JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) THE petitioners, who at the time of instituting the writ petition
were working as Personal Assistants in the High Court services, seek
judicial intervention for grant of first selection grade/first Assured
Career Progression (also referred to as ACP) to them on completion of 9
years' of service by granting them grade pay of Rs.4200/ - in the pay scale
of Rs.9300 -34800 with all consequential benefits, including payment of
arrears by adjudging that the merger of the post of Junior Personal
Assistant with that of Personal Assistant does not amount to upgradation
and/or promotion within the meaning of circular No.F.20(1) FD (Gr.2)/92
dated 25.1.1992 of the Government of Rajasthan, Finance (Gr.2)
Department, the Rajasthan Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008
(for short, hereafter referred to as '2008 Rules') as well as the Assured
Career Progression (ACP) Scheme and the note dated 4.3.2009,
pertaining thereto.
(2.) WE have heard Mr.M.S.Singhvi, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr.Manoj Bhandari, Mr.Hemant Dutt & Mr.Amit Tatia, Advocates for the
petitioners. Mr.V.K.Mathur, learned counsel for the respondent No.1 and
Dr.P.S.Bhati, learned Additional Advocate General with Mr.Pradhuman
Singh for the respondent No.2.
In brief, the pleaded case of the petitioners is that after joining the service, following their selection to the post of Stenographer, their
pay was fixed in the pay scale of Rs.5500 -175 -9000, and subsequent
thereto, the nomenclature of their post was altered to that of Junior
Personal Assistant. The Government of Rajasthan, Finance (Gr.2)
Department vide its order dated 25.1.1992 prescribed selection grades
for employees in class IV, ministerial and subordinate services and those
holding isolated posts as well as the norms for fixation of pay in such
grades, subject to the stipulations, as contained therein. This initiative
was principally, to remove stagnation for lack of promotion in service, by
way of conferment of selection grade on completion of 9, 18 & 27 years
of service. This notification was adopted by the Rajasthan High Court
(for short, hereafter referred to as 'the High Court').
(3.) WHILE the matter rested at that, before the petitioners could complete 9 years of service by 1.9.2006, the 2008 Rules were framed and
brought into force with effect from that date. The 2008 Rules as well
were made applicable to the employees of the High Court, including the
petitioners. The running pay bands and the grade pay, as accorded, and
other particulars were set out in "Sections B, C & D" of Schedule I
thereto. The petitioners have averred that under Section B, the posts of
the staff/officials of the High Court were specified and the pay of the
Personal Assistant was fixed in the running pay band of Rs.9300 -34800
with grade pay of Rs.3600. The pay band for the post of Senior Personal
Assistant was fixed at Rs.9300 -34800 with grade pay of Rs.4200. In
Section C, it was inter alia recorded that the post of Stenographer(Junior
Personal Assistant) was merged with the post of Personal Assistant. The
petitioners have mentioned that as would be apparent from the relevant
entries in Sections B & C of Schedule I to the 2008 Rules, for the post of
Stenographer and Personal Assistant, the existing pay scale had been
shown to be Rs.5500 -175 -9000 with running pay band at Rs.9300 -34800
with grade pay Rs.3600. Notwithstanding this, the finance department of
the State drew up a note dated 4.3.2009 to the effect that consequent
upon the merger of the post of Stenographer with that of Personal
Assistant, the pay of the incumbents, in the former, should be fixed after
giving the benefit of Rule 26A of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951 (for
short, hereafter referred to as '1951 Rules'), as if, the incidence of
merger was one of promotion from the post of Junior Personal Assistant
to that of Personal Assistant. The petitioners have alleged that this was
contemplated to deprive them the benefit of first selection grade/first
ACP admissible to them on completion of 9 years of service after
1.9.2006. Following this, orders dated 29.9.2011 and 1.11.2011 were issued by the High Court effecting upgradation of the post of
Stenographer (Junior Personal Assistant) to that of Personal Assistant and
upgrading 37 Junior Personal Assistants, as referred to therein, who were
in the pay scale of Rs.5500 -9000 prior to 1.9.2006 to the post of Personal
Assistant (pay scale 5500 -175 -9000) with effect from that date. Vide
order dated 24.11.2011 issued by the Registrar (Admn.) of the High
Court, the pay of the petitioners was fixed in the revised pay scale by
granting benefit of Rule 26A of 1951 Rules i.e.one advance increment
grantable on promotion. The petitioners, being aggrieved, submitted
successive representations contending primarily that the merger of the
post of Junior Personal Assistant with that of Personal Assistant did, by
no means, signify upgradation of the post of Junior Personal Assistant or
the promotion of the incumbent thereof to a higher post, and that,
though they were entitled to the benefit of first selection grade/first
ACP on completion of 9 years of service, they were pushed to suffer
perpetual loss by fixing their pay under Rule 26A of the 1951 Rules. As
the representations did not yield the reliefs sought for by them, they
have turned to this Court.;