[2025:RJ-JP:30967] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3716/2010 Vinod Kumar S/o Late Shri Krishan Kumar, 719, Sindhi Colony, Rajapark, Jaipur Raj. ----Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Rajasthan Through Secretary, Public Works Department, Secretariat, Jaipur 2. The Chief Engineer, Public Works Department Bandr, Rajasthan, Jaipur 3. The Additional Chief Engineer, Public Works Department, Zone-I, Jaipur, Rajasthan 4. The Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, City Division-I, Jaipur 5. The Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sanjeev Sogarwal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Dheeraj Tripathi, AGC HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA Order 11/08/2025 1. The petitioner has assailed order dated 04.12.2009 passed by the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the learned Tribunal’) whereby, appeal filed by the petitioner has been dismissed. Petitioner has further prayed for direction against the respondents to grant him benefit of second and third selection grade in the pay scale of Rs.5500-9000/- & 6500-10500/- on completion of 18 and 27 years along with all consequential benefits. 2. Petitioner has come out with a case that initially he was appointed on 17.01.1960 as Time Keeper under the prevailing work charged Rules, 1964. He was also assigned semi-permanent [2025:RJ-JP:30967] (2 of 3) [CW-3716/2010] status after completion of 2 years of service and regular status after completion of 10 years of service. 3. Further, the petitioner was declared as a regular cadre employee with effect from 01.04.1994 vide order dated 15.07.1994. 4. Grievance of the petitioner is that he has been working since 1960 and despite completing more than 30 years of service, no benefit of selection grade whatsoever was granted to him whereas, as per circular dated 25.01.1992 issued by the Finance Department, Government of Rajasthan, provision has been made to grant selection grade in the next promotion scale in case of those employees who could not get benefit of promotion on completion of 9/18/27 years of service as the case may be. He submits that aggrieved by the inaction of the respondents, he approached the learned Tribunal, however, the learned Tribunal has also erroneously dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner. 5. Learned counsel for the respondents while opposing the writ petition, submits that the petitioner was brought in the regular cadre with effect from 01.04.1994 and therefore, the benefits of Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951 as well as the benefits of Rajasthan Civil Services (Revised Pay Scale) Rules, 1989 shall be applicable upon the petitioner only with effect from 01.04.1994. The petitioner has retired on attaining age of superannuation in the year 1977, hence, he was not entitled for benefit of selection grade for the reason that after being brought in regular cadre with effect from 01.04.1994, he had never completed nine years of service. Learned counsel also submits that the learned Tribunal has committed no infirmity or illegality [2025:RJ-JP:30967] (3 of 3) [CW-3716/2010] dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner. Hence, he prayed for dismissing the writ petition filed by the petitioner. 6. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 7. It is admitted case of the petitioner that vide order dated 15.07.1994, after abolishing work charged Rules, the petitioner was declared as an employee of regular cadre with effect from 01.04.1994. 8. Provisions of circular dated 25.01.1992 and similar circulars have been considered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Rajasthan Vs. Jagdish Narain Chaturvedi (2009) 12 SCC 49 and the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that benefit of selection grade can be granted by calculating length of service of the employee only from the date of regular appointment. In the instant case, 01.04.1994 shall be treated as date of regular appointment of the petitioner for the purpose of selection grade. Since, before completing services of nine years, the petitioner had already retired, therefore, he was not entitled for benefit of selection grade. 9. In view of above, no case for interference was made out. Therefore, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is hereby dismissed. (ANAND SHARMA),J DIVYA /17