GARG, J. - (1.) THE petitioner has filed the present writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India on 24. 8. 2001 against the respondents with a prayer that the impugned order dtd. 8. 11. 2001 (Annex. 3) passed by the respondent No. 2 (Superintendent, Associated Groups of Hospitals, Jodhpur) by which earlier order dtd. 9. 11. 1988 (Annex. 2) passed by the respondent No. 2 (Superintendent, Associated Groups of Hospitals, Jodhpur) by which the petitioner was granted pay scale No. 6 in place of pay scale No. 3 was cancelled, be quashed and set aside.
(2.) THE facts of the case as put forward by the petitioner are as under: (i) That the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Tailor through order dtd. 13. 2. 1981 (Annex. 1 ). He was appointed in the pay scale of Rs. 250-360 (Pay Scale No. 3 ). (ii) Further case of the petitioner is that services of the petitioner were confirmed through order dtd. 9. 12. 1983. (iii) Further case of the petitioner is that he was possessing qualification upto 8th standard plus commercial diploma from Mumbai and ITI and the said qualification was prescribed in the Rajasthan Subordinate Services (Recruitment to other Service Conditions) Rules, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules of 1960 ). (iv) Further case of the petitioner is that the through order dtd. 9. 12. 1988 (Annex. 2) passed by the respondent No. 2 (Superintendent, Associated Groups of Hospitals, Jodhpur), the petitioner was given pay scale of Rs. 820-1520 (pay scale No. 6) on the newly created post because he was possessing all the requisite qualifications prescribed in the Rules of 1960. (iv) Further case of the petitioner is that all of a sudden, the order dtd. 8. 11. 2001 (Annex. 3) was passed by the respondent No. 2 (Superintendent) by which the order dtd. 9. 12. 1998 (Annex. 2) was cancelled by which the petitioner was granted the pay scale No. 6 and instead of pay scale No. 6, the petitioner was granted pay scale No. 3. Hence, this writ petition with the abovermentioned prayer. In this writ petition, following submissions have been made by the learned counsel for the petitioner: (i) That before passing the impugned order dtd. 8. 11. 2001 (Annex. 3), no notice or opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner and thus, the same is wholly illegal being passed in violation of principles of natural justice and on that ground alone, the impugned order dtd. 8. 11. 2001 (Annex. 3) is liable to be quashed and set aside. (ii) That the petitioner was possessing all the requisite qualifications for the post of Tailor and he was granted the pay scale No. 6 way back in the year 1988, but all of a sudden after a lapse of 13 years, the order dtd. 8. 11. 2001 (Annex. 3) was passed by which the order dtd. 9. 12. 1988 (Annex. 2) by which the petitioner was granted pay scale No. 6, was cancelled and thus, the order dtd. 8. 11. 2001 (Annex. 3) is highly arbitrary, unreasonable, unfair and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India as there was no fault on the part of the petitioner when he was given the pay scale No. 6 through order dtd. 9. 12. 1988 (Annex. 2) and thus, the order dtd. 8. 11. 2001 (Annex. 3) cannot be sustained and is liable to be quashed and set aside. Reply to the writ petition was filed by the respondents and their case is that one Smt. Kamla who was senior to the petitioner filed a S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3073/1999 before this Court stating that she was senior to the petitioner and as such, she was also entitled to get the pay scale No. 6 which was being paid to the petitioner and when the matter was re-examined by the respondents, then it came to the light that petitioner was wrongly sanctioned pay scale No. 6, though the petitioner should have been fixed in the pay scale No. 3 and hence the impugned order dtd. 8. 11. 2001 (Annex. 3) was rightly passed and the order dtd. 9. 12. 1988 (Annex. 2) was rightly cancelled. Further case of the respondents is that in pursuance of order dtd. 8. 11. 2001 (Annex. 3), the pay of the petitioner was revised and the petitioner was fixed in the pay scale No. 3 through order dated 9. 3. 2002 (Annex. R/2 ). It has been further submitted by the respondents that the order dtd 8. 11. 2001 (Annex. 3) was passed in view of order dtd. 10. 9. 2001 (Annex. R/1) and hence no case was made out and the writ petition be dismissed. Heard. There is no dispute on the point that the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Tailor through order dtd. 13. 2. 1981 (Annex. 1) in the pay scale of Rs. 250-360 (pay scale No. 3 ).
(3.) THERE is also no dispute on the point that the petitioner was possessing all the requisite qualification for getting the pay scale No. 6. There is also no dispute on the point that through order dtd. 9. 12. 1988 (Annex. 2), the petitioner was fixed in pay scale No. 6. There is also no dispute on the point that since the date of passing of order dtd. 9. 12. 1988 (Annex. 2), the petitioner was getting pay scale No. 6 and his pay scale was revised from time to time as per revision of pay scales made by the State Government. ;