[2025:RJ-JP:31299] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19939/2013 1. Dau Dayal Sharma Son Of Late Shri Shambhu Dayal Sharma, aged about 59 years, R/o Mandir Baba Saligram, Nai Mandi Bharatpur 2. Chhetra Pal Sharma Son Of Shri Munshi Lal Sharma, aged about 62 years, (retired as MI.-II), R/o Near Chand Pole Gate, Namak Katra, Bharatpur ----Petitioners Versus 1. Chairman Cum Managing Director, Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited, Vidyut Marg, Jaipur 2. Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited Through Its Secretary Admn., Vidyut Marg, Jaipur 3. Chief Accounts Officer (ATR), Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited, Vidyut Bhawan, Janpath, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur 4. Chief Personnel Officer, Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited, Vidyut Bhawan, Janpath, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur 5. Assistant Personnel Officer (O & M), Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited, Near Power House Premises, Moti Jheel, Bharatpur ----Respondents Connected With S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5444/2013 Behari Lal Yadav S/o Ramsahai Yadav, R/o Opp. Town Hall, Alwar ----Petitioner Versus 1. C.M.D., Jaipur Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd., Registered Office Vidyut Bhawan, Janpath Jyoti Nagar Jaipur. 2. Jaipur Vidhyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd. Jaipur Through Its Secretary Admn. Vidyut Bhawan, Janpath Jyoti 3. Jaipur Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd. AEN (A-IV) JVVNAL, Alwar ----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5445/2013 Gopal Kishan Aggarwal S/o Radhsyam Aggarwal aged about 53 [2025:RJ-JP:31299] (2 of 6) [CW-19939/2013] years R/o 3 Ka 15 Manu Mark Housing Board, Alwar ----Petitioner Versus 1. C.M.D, Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. registered office Vidyut Bhawan, Janpath Jyoti Nagar Jaipur. 2. Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd, Jaipur through its Secretary (Admn.), Vidyut Bhawan, Janpath Jyoti Nagar Jaipur. 3. Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. AEN (A-I) JVVNL, Alwar. ----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5447/2013 Phool Chand Saini S/o Ghanshyam Lal Saini R/o Pawata Wala Kuwa, Alwar. ----Petitioner Versus 1. C.M.D., Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. registered office Vidyut Bhawan, Janpath Jyoti Nagar Jaipur. 2. Jaipur Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. Jaipur through its Secretary (Admn.), Vidyut Bhawan, Janpath Nagar Jaipur. 3. Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. AEN (A-IV) JVVNL, Alawar. ----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19175/2013 Madan Lal Raiger S/o Shri Parsa Ram aged about 54 years R/o Village Post Danta, Teh. Danta Ramgarh, Near Referral Hospital, District Sikar Raj., Presently Posted As Meter Reader Grade-II In The Office Of AEN O & M AVVNL Data Ramgarh, Sikar ----Petitioner Versus 1. Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. AVVNL Hathi Bhatha, Power House, Ajmer Through Its Managing Director 2. The Superintendent Engineer, (Sikar Circle) Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. AVVNL, Sikar ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Suresh Kashyap in CWP No. 19939/2013 Mr. Mohit Gupta with Mr. Nikhil Kumawat in CWP [2025:RJ-JP:31299] (3 of 6) [CW-19939/2013] No.5444/2013 For Respondent(s) : Ms. Aditi on behalf of Ms. Anuradha Upadhayay in CWP. No.19939/2013 Ms. Priya Rastogi in CWP No.19175/2023 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA Order 12/08/2025 1. Learned counsel appearing for both the sides are in agreement that the facts and question involved in all the above cases are almost similar. Hence, these petitions were heard analogously and are being decided by this common judgment. For the purpose of convenience facts stated in S.B. No. 19939/2013 have been taken into consideration. 2. The petitioners have come out with a case that they were initially appointed on the post of Bill distributor/Meter Reader/ Peon, which as per the petitioners are included in Class-IV Cadre constituted in respondent- Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. (JVVNL) Employees Service Regulations, 1964. The dispute came to the surface when the question with regard to entitlement of the pay scale while extending benefit of selection grade arose. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the controversy has been set at rest by the judgment delivered by this Court in the case of Rajasthan Rajya Vidhyut Karmarchari Federation Vs. Jodhpur Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. & Anr. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5584/1994) decided on 15.01.2008, which was subsequently followed by Co-ordinate [2025:RJ-JP:31299] (4 of 6) [CW-19939/2013] Bench of this Court at Principal Seat, Jodhpur in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 452/2009. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that in the aforesaid judgment, in quite explicit and unambiguous terms, directions have been given by this Court for granting benefit of selection scale to Class-IV employees working with the electricity companies on completion of nine years of service in the pay scale prescribed for the post of Lower Division Clerk (LDC). Such selection grades were directed to be given in accordance with Government Rajasthan Circular dated 25.01.1992, with the caveat that while giving such benefit the respondents would ascertain that the aspirants were eligible to be considered for promotion on the post of LDC. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that pursuant to aforesaid judgment and while referring the clear cut directions given during the aforesaid judgment, representations were made by the petitioners to the respondent however, the representation has been rejected in quite mechanical and cryptic manner by simply stating that cases of the petitioners do not fall within the ambit of aforesaid judgments passed by this Court. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that while rejecting the representations, the respondents have not taken into consideration the schedule appended to Employees Service Regulation, 1964 where in Appendix-II details of different posts which are included in Class-IV Cadre has been given. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioners have also raised a grievance that the respondents have also not considered that irrespective of nomenclature of the post, be it Peon, Meter Reader [2025:RJ-JP:31299] (5 of 6) [CW-19939/2013] or Bill Distributor, they all come within the same cadre of Class-IV employees. 8. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents opposed the writ petition and submitted that the candidature of the petitioners was considered strictly in accordance with Regulations of 1964 as well as within the parameters laid down by this Court in the aforesaid judgment. After thorough consideration, petitioners were not found eligible for getting selection grade in the pay scale of lower division clerk, hence such benefits were not granted to them. 9. I have considered the rival submissions and examined the record. Bare perusal of the order dated 28.02.2013 (Annex-7) would reveal that the order does not provide any justification, much less than any plausible justification, to deny benefit of selection grade in the pay scale of LDC as directed by this Court in the aforesaid judgment. The administrative authorities while deciding the representation are under an obligation to consider all the facts and rules, which are relevant for the purpose of adjudicating the facts stated in the representation. More so, in the instant case where the representation was made to take benefits in compliance of judgments given by this Court, the duty to consider the contents of representation along with rules and other relevant consideration, was much higher. 10. From bare perusal, I find that the order dated 28.02.2013 passed by the respondent-Corporation is totally unreasoned and non-speaking and is therefore quashed and set- aside. [2025:RJ-JP:31299] (6 of 6) [CW-19939/2013] 11. The Managing Director of Jaipur Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. is directed to pass a fresh speaking order considering the regulations of 1964, nature of work carried out by all the petitioners, as well as directions given by this Court in the judgments referred hereinabove. The representations shall be decided after considering all the relevant factors and on the basis of sound reasoning within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of fresh representation along with this order. In case, the petitioners are found entitled for the relief of selection grade in the pay scale of LDC, then such benefits shall be extended within a period of eight weeks thereafter along with arrears admissible to the respective petitioners. 12. With the aforesaid directions, all the writ petitions stand disposed of. (ANAND SHARMA),J NEERU/46-50