Jethu Singh v. State Of Rajasthan & Ors.

The Superintending associated group of hospitals, Jodhpur utilized services of the petitioner as Lab-Attendant and as Lab Technicians from 08.7.1992 to 07.1.1993 with 6% of his total wages as presumptive pay as per Rule 50 of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951. His services were also utilized as Lab-Technicians from 13.9.2004 to 14.10.04 with 3% of his salary as presumptive pay. The payment of pay aforesaid, has been denied hence, this petition for writ is preferred.

As per the respondents, the petitioner was officiating on the post of Lab-Technician therefore, in view of the provisions of Rule 35 of Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951, he is not entitled for any amount higher then the substitutive pay.

I have considered all the facts of the case and the arguments advanced. It is not in dispute that the post of Lab-Attendant is a post in Class IV cadre service of the Government of Rajasthan, whereas the post of Lab Technician is a subordinate service as per Rajasthan Medical and Health Subordinate Service Rules, 1965. As such, the post of Lab-Technician is a post in higher cadre to the cadre in which the petitioner is working. Rule 35 of the Rules of 1951 restrains for payment of higher pay then substantive pay, only if, the officiating appointments involves equallent duties and responsibilities to the original post. The decision in the instant matter is entirely different. The duties and responsibilities of Lab Technician are of greater importance then attached with the post of Lab Attendant. As already stated earlier, the post of Lab Technician is part of subordinate service whereas, the post of Lab Attendant is in class IV cadre. Rule, 50 of the Rules of 1951 also prescribes that if a Government servant is having any combination of appointments for two independent posts, at one time, then, a presumptive pay may be allowed to him but, that should not be exceeded to 10% of his substantive pay. In the instant case, the respondents at their own allowed 6% additional pay to the petitioner, for the period commencing from 08.7.1992 to 07.1.1993 and 3% additional wages from 13.9.2004 to 14.11.2004 Such grant is not commened with the provisions of Rule 50 of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951. The denial for such payment by banking upon Rule 35 of the Rules of 1951 is absolutely erroneous.

The petition accordingly, dismissed and the respondents are directed to make payment of additional wages to the petitioner @ 6% for the period commencing from dated 08.7.1992 to 07.1.1993 and @ 3% for the period commencing from 13.9.2004 to 14.1.2004 The petitioners shall also be entitled for an interest @ 4.5% per annum for the delayed payment in additional pay.