- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the applicant. The misc. application accompanying the review petition aforementioned is under section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for condonation of delay in filing the same. A review and reconsideration of the judgment and order dated 10.1.2013 passed in D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 175/2009 is sought for.
(2.) According to the applicant, after obtaining the certified copy of the impugned judgment and order on 22.1.2013, he took steps for filing the Special Leave Petition before the Hon'ble Apex Court. However, having been advised that a review petition ought to be made before this Court, he engaged himself in making the necessary arrangements for funds etc. He has stated that he had in order to meet the expenditure of the review proceedings, obtained loan from his near relations, which consumed about 3-4 months. His learned counsel at Jodhpur as well could not file the review petition immediately as he was busy in personal commitments. The review petition was eventually filed on 27.5.2013 and as a result, a delay of 101 days occurred.
(3.) Be that as it may, the applicant had filed the D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 175/2009 being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 27.8.2008 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 01/2007 rejecting his prayer for salary and other allowances at par with the employees serving in the Non-Government Educational Institution. The pleaded facts reveal that he was initially appointed as Library Clerk on adhoc basis on 29.8.1998 for one academic session with the Bhopalwala Arya Senior Secondary School, Sri Ganganagar (for short, hereinafter referred to as "the Institution") on a fixed pay of Rs. 2,000/- per month. Thereafter, the process for regular appointment was initiated on 11.6.1999 in which he participated but was declared unsuccessful. One Ram Sharma, who was working as LDC on permanent basis in the Institution, was selected for the post. He however, did not challenge the validity of the selection process and instead accepted the fresh appointment on contract basis offered by the Institution and rendered his services till the same were terminated on 8.7.2005. He thereafter, approached the learned Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institutions Tribunal (for short, hereafter referred to as "the Tribunal") by filing appeal being No. 88/2005. The learned Tribunal returned a finding that the initial appointment of the applicant on 29.8.1998 as Library Clerk was not in accordance with the provisions of the Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institutions Act, 1989 (for short, hereinafter referred to as "the Act") and therefore, his claim for parity of pay with his counterparts in the State service was not tenable. As his challenge to the determination was rejected by the learned Single Judge, the appeal was preferred.;