- (1.) The instant writ petition is directed against the order dated 13.5.2015 (Annex.11) passed by the Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institutions Tribunal, Jaipur, (for short "the Tribunal"), whereby application filed under Section 25 of the Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institutions Act, 1989, read with Order 9 Rule 13 and Section 151 CPC for setting aside the ex parte judgment/decree dated 25.2.2015 (Annx.7), was dismissed.
(2.) The brief facts noticed are that the respondent is a Teacher, who filed an application before the petitioner-Committee claiming benefits conferred on account of the 6th Pay Commission and other benefits, leave encashment etc. It was stated that she was appointed as Teacher Gr.III on 27.6.1966 and was appointed as Senior Teacher on 25.8.1992, and rendering excellent services retired on 31.8.2009. It was claimed that as the petitioner-Institution receives grant-in-aid from the Government, and hence in accordance with the Notification/Circular of the State Government dated 25.1.1992 the respondent was entitled to selection pay scale, and because the same was not granted, the respondent claimed the same before the petitioner-Committee. As the petitioner-Institution/Committee did not grant her any relief upon such application, an application was filed for the same before Tribunal.
(3.) Notices sent by the Tribunal, were duly served on the petitioners, however, they chose not to appear before the Tribunal. After hearing the counsel for respondent and the counsel for the Director, Secondary Education, it was directed that the respondent was entitled for all the benefits conferred on her of selection pay scale and also Rajasthan Civil Services (Revised Pay Scale) Rules, 2008, and her salary was to be in accordance with the Rules of 2008, and she was also entitled to other retiral benefits, encashment of leave etc., and accordingly passed the order. Thereafter the petitioners filed misc. application bearing no.12/2015 under Order 9 Rule 13 read with Section 151 CPC for recalling/quashing of the decree passed on 25.2.2015 in Application No.122/2010, primarily contending that the respondent was not entitled to the benefits of the 6th Pay Commission and other benefits etc. and also that no notice was served on the petitioner institution and notices, if any, served on the U.D.C. of the institution, was not correct and was denied. It was also pleaded that name of the recipient clerk was not readable and, therefore, there was no valid service and, hence, the order passed on 25.2.2015 was liable to be set aside. The Tribunal, after hearing counsel for the petitioners, counsel for the respondent, as also the Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner, held that the notices were duly served on the petitioners on 31.3.2011 and 29.10.2012, which was proved on the basis of affidavit sworn by Process Server, as also the notices which bear seal of the Institution. The Tribunal also came to the conclusion that merely because the name of the clerk was not clearly depicted, that did not lead to the conclusion that notices were not received.;