JUDGMENT
Verma, J.
1. The petitioner was initially appointed as Carpenter in Public Works Department in December, 1969 on daily wages, and was declared semi permanent w.e.f. 6.12.1971 with the recommendation to place him in the pay scale of Rs. 130-300, but before the action could be taken his service were terminated. The petitioner contested the termination by raising Industrial Dispute and was successful
in getting the award passed in his favour dated 15.2.75, when his termination of service was held to be illegal. The petitioner was allowed on join the duties on 18.2.75 in the office of Asstt. Engineer, Public Works Department (B&R), City Sub Division, Jaipur.
2. It is the contention of petitioner that he was, though, semi permanent from 6.12.1971, but he was not given the scale of Rs. 130-300, but rather an order was passed for fixing his pay scale as Rs. 100-180 vide annexure-3. The petitioner states that he was declared semi permanent on 6.12.71 and in supersession of earlier order dated 6.8.77, he was given the pay scale Rs. 100-180. The petitioner being aggrieved against such an action issued a notice to respondents stating therein that he has been discriminated when similarly situated persons had been granted the pay scale of Rs. .130-300 and relies on a judgment of this court dated 3.7.97 in case of Satya Narayan v. State of Rajasthan (I), wherein it was held that such Carpenter was entitled to the declared as semi permanent after completing two years of service and was granted the scale of Carpenter Gr.I.
3. It is submitted by the petitioner that Satya Narain who had been granted the scale was junior to him as per the seniority list of Carpenters Gr.II which has been placed on record. Matadeen has been shown at No. 3 having joined the service on 6.12.1969 whereas Satya narain has been shown to have joined the service on 12.7.1984, but still Satya Narain has been granted the higher scale. Photo-stat copy showing that the petitioner is senior to Satya Narain is placed on record.
4. Reply has been filed by respondents. It is admitted that the petitioner was declared semi permanent on 6.12.71 and the case was recommended to fix his pay in the pay scale No. 9 Rs. 130- 300. It is further submitted that the period from termination of service to reinstatement was treated as leave without pay and he was given a status of junior carpenter. However, the objection has been taken regarding maintainability of writ petition. It was further submitted that the petitioner has even been given selection scale after completing the service of 9 years, 18 years and 27 years.
5. Vide Annexure-1 the petitioner was recommended to be placed in the scale of Rs. 130-300 i.e. in the scale No. 9 by Senior Architect (B&R). However, in the order dated 8.5.1978 (Annexure- 3), no reason has been given as to why the petitioner was fixed in the scale of Rs. 100-180 and why not in the scale of Rs. 130- 300 as was given to Satya narain who was admittedly junior to him. Satya Narain was also shown as Carpenter Gr. II below the petitioner. The petitioner cannot be deprived of the grade which has been given to his junior Satya Narain who joined the service about 13 years after the petitioner.
6. The duties of Carpenter where-ever he is employed is the same and, therefore, there cannot be any discrimination between one Carpenter or the other Carpenter. Nothing has been brought on record by the respondent to show that the present petitioner should be entitled to the lesser grade than any other Carpenter. Even in the Schedule II under item No. 33, the scale of junior Carpenter has been mentioned as Rs. 100-180 whereas at Item No. 65 Senior Carpenter has been placed in the Scale of Rs. 130-300. It is not clear as to how the department has classified the Carpenter as Junior Carpenter and Senior Carpenter if both are doing the same duties. The petitioner is a Carpenter for last more than 30 years. There cannot be discrimination of Junior or Senior Carpenter and, therefore, for the reason that his junior has been placed in Senior Scale of Carpenter, the petitioner shall also be entitled for the same. It is, therefore, directed that the petitioner shall be entitled to Rs. 130-300 from 1971 when he was made semi-permanent and his pay shall be fixed accordingly as per the revised pay scale Rules from time to time as per his service record. The complete exercise shall be done within a period of three months and the arrears shall be paid within the stipulated period. In case arrear is not paid within the time stipulated, it shall fetch interest @ 12% p.a. thereafter.
7. The writ petition is accordingly allowed.