- (1.) Though the matter comes upon an interim application under Article 226(3) of the Constitution of India, for vacation of ex-parte interim order dated 6th December, 2013; however, having regard to the nature of the controversy involved, the matter has been taken up for final disposal at this stage, with the consent of the parties.
(2.) Aggrieved of the order passed by the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur (for short 'the Tribunal'), the State-petitioners have instituted the present writ petition with a prayer to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 14th December, 2012, passed by the Tribunal while allowing the appeal of the respondent-employee (Babu Lal Ujjwal), the petitioners have been directed to accord the benefit of second selection scale, after completion of 18 years of service with effect from 17th February, 2002; and simultaneously quashed and set aside the order dated 2nd September, 2002, impugned therein.
(3.) Briefly, the essential material facts necessary for appreciation of the controversy raised herein needs to be first noticed. The respondent-employee was initially appointed as Gazette Wrapper with effect from 16th April, 1979, under the Rajasthan Government Presses Subordinate Service Rules, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules of 1973', for short). He was accorded promotion to the post of Binder Grade-II with effect from 17th February, 1984. The Government of Rajasthan vide order dated 25th January, 1992 and 17th February, 1998, accorded benefit of selection grades on completion of 9, 18 and 27 years of service to the employees, who were not accorded promotion although were eligible. The respondent-employee instituted an appeal before the Tribunal with a prayer to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 2nd September, 2002, and direct the petitioner-employer to accord benefit of second selection grade on completion of 18 years of service with effect from 17th February, 2002, with all consequential benefits. The Tribunal taking into consideration the pleaded facts, response of the petitioner-employer, evidence and the materials available on record; acceded to the prayer of the respondent-employee vide order dated 14th December, 2012, of which the State-petitioners are 5aggrieved of.;