Parshuram vs State Of Raj & Ors on 16 July, 2010

    

 
 
 

 In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan
Jaipur Bench, Jaipur
O R D E R
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8927/2010
Parshuram Vs. State of Raj. & Ors.

Date of Order     :      16/07/2010

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi

Mr. Amit Jindal, for petitioner.
		Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that on account of penalty of censure, benefit of selection scale cannot be deferred and in support of his submission, counsel placed reliance upon the judgments of this Court delivered in case of Devi Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. reported in 2004(2) CDR 925 (Raj.) and State & Anr. Vs. Bheem Singh reported in 2009 WLC (Raj.) UC Page No.8 and Prabhu Lal Meghwal Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9536/2005. The judgment of Division Bench has been followed by the coordinate bench of this Court in S.B.  Civil  Writ Petition No.9536/2005 (Prabhu Lal Meghwal Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.) which was decided on 26.8.2008, wherein it has been held that grant of selection grade neither constitutes a separate cadre nor involves an element of selection; it is rather automatic and personal to incumbent on completion of number of years of service. However, penalty of censure which is treated to be one of the minor penalty will not come in the way of deferment of the selection scale. However, every penalty provided under Rule 14 of the CCA Rules may not be construed as a ground for deferment. The operative part of the judgment is as follows :-

The view taken by the Division Bench thus is that the grant of selection grade neither constitutes a separate cadre nor involves an element of selection. It is rather automatic and personal to incumbent and involves an element of selection. Unlike promotion higher pay scale is not restricted to certain number of posts. The aforesaid observations made in the context of penalty of censure whereas the substantive penalty of stoppage of annual grade increment has to be viewed in a different way. What is true of censure may not be applicable to the substantive penalty of stoppage of annual grade increments. In any case, however the action of respondents in deferring the grant of selection scale to the petitioner for the penalty of eight censure awarded to the petitioner cannot be justified but his third selection scale grade could be delayed maximum by two years for two penalties of withholding of annual grade increments. This writ petition, therefore, deserves to be partly allowed.

In the light of the judgments referred to supra, the present writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the petitioner to make a representation to the respondents which shall be considered for grant of selection scale in the light of the aforesaid judgments referred to supra. The authority may decide the matter by passing a speaking order within three months from the date of submission of representation in accordance with law.

(Ajay Rastogi), J.

VS Shekhawat/p.3/
8927cw10Jul16FnlRep-Pnlty.do