VYAS, J. - (1.) BY way of filing the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for directions to the respondents to release all retiral benefits i. e. pension, gratuity to the petitioner with interest at the rate of 18% p. a. from the date the same has become due till the same is paid. Further it is prayed that the respondents may be directed to grant selection grade to the petitioner on completion of 9, 18 and 27 years of service.
(2.) ACCORDING to the facts of the case stated in the writ petition, the petitioner was initially appointed as Pump Driver under the Work Charged Rules in the pay scale of 75-160 on 1. 10. 1965 and he was also allowed regular increments. The petitioner raised an industrial dispute under Section 12 (3) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 in which a compromise was arrived at in between the parties and in that compromise, the petitioner agreed to accept his seniority on the post of Electrician Grade-II to be determined w. e. f. 6. 12. 1969, so also accepted that his pay may be fixed in the pay scale of Electrician Grade II w. e. f. 1. 11. 1973. The department agreed to fix the petitioner's pay in the pay-scale of Rs. 130. 8. 170. 10. 210-300 w. e. f. 1. 11. 1973. In pursuance of the said compromise, the pay fixation of the petitioner was made after due verification by the respondent- department. Thereafter, the petitioner was promoted on the post of Supervisor vide order dated 31. 10. 1985 in the pay scale of Rs. 470. 10. 490-20-830 retrospectively w. e. f. 30. 10. 1976 but the said promotion was given on notional basis and if in case arrear is admissible as per rules then the same were ordered to be paid accordingly. After promotion, the annual grade increments were also granted to the petitioner and benefit of fixation was given to the petitioner from -time to time as and when the pay scale were revised and in this process lastly the petitioner's pay was fixed in the pay scale 5000-150-8000 w. e. f. 1. 1. 1996 as per the fixation approved by the Assistant Accounts Officer of the Department. The petitioner after attaining the age of superannuation retired from service on 30. 6. 2003 and at that time he was getting salary in the pay scale of Rs. 5000-150-8000/ -. After retirement, the retiral benefits were not paid to the petitioner. However, he was informed that provisional pension is being granted to him subject to the decision on the final grant of pension and retiral benefits. The petitioner in this writ petition has prayed for granting selection pay scale as per circular dated 25. 1. 1992 while treating his initial appointment as 1. 10. 1965, so also raised grievance that though he has been retired on 30. 6. 2003 but respondents are not granting his retiral benefits including final pension and other benefits. For the same though he has served notice of demand of justice upon the respondents on 17. 4. 2004 but they are not giving any heed to the representation.
(3.) AS per the information of the petitioner, the respondents are not finalizing his retiral benefits because on 15. 1. 2004, a letter was issued by the Chief Engineer addressed to the Superintending Engineer wherein certain objections were raised. The petitioner has placed on record, the said letter dated 15. 1. 2004 on record as Annx.-3. Upon perusal of Annexure-3, it is revealed that the case of the petitioner for grant of selection scale w. e. f. 1. 1. 1998 was sent to the Office of the Chief Engineer and upon enquiry it is found that the petitioner was wrongly granted promotion on the post of Supervisor as he was not possessing qualification for the post of Supervisor, therefore, while observing in the letter by the Chief Engineer, Irrigation (North), Hanumangarh that promotion of the petitioner on the post of Supervisor w. e. f. 30. 10. 1976 was illegal, therefore, the matter may be decided after re-fixation and recovering the amount from the petitioners, meaning thereby vide this order Annexure- 3, the respondent has defined the order of the promotion as illegal and contrary to the rules and order of the recovery and re-fixation has been made. The petitioner has challenged the said order because after superannuation, the order dated 15. 1. 2004 has been passed in which it is mentioned that the petitioners promotion which was made notionally w. e. f. 30. 10. 1976 vide order dated 1. 10. 1985, was illegal. ;