AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a
direction to the respondents to treat the petitioner appointed on
the post of Accountant from the date on which, persons lower in
merit to the petitioner were appointed. Further directions have
been sought for fixing the petitioner''s seniority and pay &
allowances from the date, persons junior to the petitioner were
given appointment.
The writ petition arose in the circumstances that Rajasthan
Public Service Commission, Rajasthan (RPSC) advertised
vacancies for the post of Accountant and the petitioner applied for
the same. The result of the petitioner was declared and after
thrice revising the same, the petitioner was placed in merit list at 59th number. The petitioner got his documents verified and
completed other formalities, however, the respondents did not
issue the appointment letter to the petitioner.
The petitioner filed the S.B. Civil Writ Petition
No.13997/2013, wherein notices were issued to the respondents,
During the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner was
accorded appointment by order dated 29.5.2014 and, therefore,
the writ petition was dismissed as infructuous.
It is submitted that the persons, who were lower in merit to
the petitioner were accorded appointment on 31.1.2013 and
petitioner was accorded appointment on 29.5.2014 and, therefore,
direction is required to be issued to the respondents to treat the
petitioner appointed on the date, persons lower in merit to the
petitioner were appointed and grant him seniority and pay fixation
taking into consideration the date, persons junior to petitioner
were accorded appointment.
Response to the writ petition has been filed by the
respondents, wherein, it is indicated, as part of preliminary
objections, that the seniority of the petitioner is according to his
merit i.e. 59/2011 and the petitioner does not become junior due
to date of joining and his seniority remains as such and will
remain as such according to the merit. Thereafter, it is indicated
that as the petitioner assumed charge of the post on 10.6.2014,
pay & allowances as admissible are granted from the date of
joining and there is no question of grant of any pay or allowances
on the basis of the fact that persons lower in merit joined earlier.
Learned counsel for the petitioner made submissions that
though, response has been given that the petitioner would be
treated as per his merit qua the persons, who were lower in merit,
despite the fact that the persons lower in merit were accorded
appointment on 31.1.2013 and the petitioner was accorded
appointment on 29.5.2014, the respondents may be directed to
give notional benefits to the petitioner from the date on which,
persons lower in merit, were appointed regarding pay &
allowances as well.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted
that the stand of the respondents is made clear in the reply,
wherein, once the petitioner is treated as per his merit qua the
persons lower in merit to the petitioner, the consequences would
follow and, therefore, no direction needs to be issued in the
present writ petition.
Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel
for the parties and the specific stand taken by the respondents in
the reply that irrespective of the date of appointment, the
petitioner would be treated senior to the persons, who were lower
in merit to the petitioner, no directions qua the said aspect needs
to be given. However, it is directed that the pay & allowances of
the petitioner would also be fixed notionally in accordance with
pay & allowances as being paid to the persons, who were lower in
merit to the petitioner at the relevant time, if not already done.
With the above directions, the writ petition filed by the
petitioner stands disposed of.