Amitava Roy, J. - (1.) THE common judgment and order dated 28.4.2006 rendered in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5441/2002 has been separately assailed by the National Institute of Ayurveda, Jaipur and the State of Rajasthan through its Ayurveda Department. By the decision impugned, the respondent -writ -petitioner's claim for being granted the service benefits following his promotion to the post of Professor under the State Government with effect from 9.12.1976 has been sustained. As thereby the consequential liability has been apportioned between the National Institute of Ayurveda (for short, hereafter referred to as "the Institute") and the State Government to the extent as indicated therein, both being aggrieved seek redress.
(2.) WE have heard Mr. M.D. Agarwal, learned counsel for the appellant -Institute and Mr. S.K. Gupta, learned Additional Advocate General for the appellant -State. We have also heard Mr. R.L. Jain, learned counsel for the respondent -writ -petitioner. The facts in bare essentials as can be gathered from the rival pleadings outline the backdrop of the debate. The respondent -writ -petitioner, who was initially appointed as Lecturer in the Ayurveda Vishwa Bharti College, Sardarsahar with effect from 8.7.1959 was following the closure of the said College on 13.7.1971, absorbed in the services of the State by order dated 16.6.1972, whereupon he joined the post of Lecturer under it on 1.7.1972. The Institute was established on 7.2.1976 and following a tripartite agreement involving the State of Rajasthan, Central Government and the Institute, his services were placed on deputation with the Institute on and from 7.2.1976. Clause -15 of the agreement dated 1.6.1976 was in the following terms: - - "(15). The terms and conditions of services of the State Government employees transferred to the services of the Institute shall not be less advantageous as compared to the conditions of services under the State Government." As the records would reveal, the respondent -writ -petitioner continued on deputation with the Institute and eventually he having finally opted to that effect, was absorbed/confirmed with effect from 1.4.1983 and his lien with the State Government stood terminated on and from the said date. Significantly, he had been taken on deputation with the Institute as Assistant Professor. Meanwhile, the respondent -writ -petitioner by the order of the State Government in the Ayurveda Department had been promoted to the post of Professor with effect from 27.4.1981. He having unsuccessfully represented before the State Government that his said promotion ought to be from 1976, preferred an appeal before the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur (for short, hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal"), which by its order dated 7.9.1998 directed that he be provided with promotion to the post of Professor with effect from 9.12.1976. Noticeably, the Institute was not made a party in the appeal. Be that as it may, the State Government being aggrieved by this determination instituted S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2668/2000 before this Court, which was dismissed on 3.7.2000 and the decision of the learned Tribunal was affirmed. It was thereafter, that the State Government by its order dated 18.1.2001 promoted the respondent -writ -petitioner to the post of Professor with effect from 9.12.1976. In the writ proceedings as well, the Institute was not arrayed as a party. The respondent -writ -petitioner being armed with this adjudication represented before the Institute to release the financial and other benefits consequent upon his promotion to the post of Professor with effect from 9.12.1976. He eventually turned to this Court seeking to invoke its writ jurisdiction for redress.
(3.) THE Institute in its reply admitted that its Screening Committee following an interview of the then teaching staff of the Government Ayurvedic College of Jaipur and the Government Ayurvedic College, Udaipur had submitted its recommendation on 9.7.1977 inter -alia proposing the absorption of the respondent -writ -petitioner as Assistant Professor in its rolls. The recommendation was approved by the Governing Body of the Institute and accordingly, he was offered appointment vide memorandum dated 24.6.1978 in which it was amongst others categorically mentioned that he would have to obtain the benefits of his past services rendered in the State Government from it (State Government) and that the Institute would not have any responsibility in this regard. The answering respondent averred that the respondent -writ -petitioner accepted the offer and assumed the charge of the post of Assistant Professor on 29.12.1978. It admitted further that he was finally absorbed alongwith other staff with effect from 1.4.1983 vide order dated 24.11.1983 and his lien with the State Government stood terminated on and from 1.4.1983. The Institute averred further that the respondent -writ -petitioner was thereafter promoted as Associate Professor and subsequent thereto as Professor vide orders dated 30.4.1985 and 3.4.1992 respectively and that he was superannuated on 30.6.1995 and since then he is receiving his pension from it as per the relevant Rules.;