Ganesh @APPELLANT@Hash State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Matter comes upon application for early listing of the matter.

For the reasons mentioned in the application, same is allowed and matter is taken up for hearing today.

By the instant writ petition, petitioners have prayed for under -mentioned reliefs:-

“(a) By an appropriate writ, order or directions the respondents may be directed to issue orders of confirmation of petitioners on the post of safai

employee.

(b) By an appropriate writ, order or directions the respondents may be directed grant relief regular pay scale of safai employee to the petitioners.

(c) By an appropriate writ, order or directions the respondents may be directed to release arrears of regular pay scale with interest to petitioners by

treating them to be confirmed on the post of safai employee on expiry of two years of probation.

(d) By an appropriate writ, order or directions, the respondents may be directed to pay the amount less paid to them during the period of probation with

interest.

(e) Any other order or direction, which this Hon’ble Court deemed just and proper be passed in favour of the petitioners;

(f) Costs of this petition may kindly be allowed to the petitioners.â€​

Bare necessary facts, for the purpose of this writ petition, are that pursuant to Advertisement No.1/2012 petitioners were recruited on the post of

Safai Employee under the Municipal Board, Phalodi, District Jodhpur.   The recruitment process was undertaken in accordance with the

Rajasthan Municipalities (Safai Employees Service) Rules, 2012.  Pursuant to the selection, the petitioners were appointed vide order dated 28th

of February 2014 and all of them joined their duty.  It is, inter alia, averred in the petition that since inception of their service career, all of them

are discharging their duties with utmost satisfaction, but the respondent Municipal Board has not allowed them requisite service benefits including the

pay-scale of the post, which is consequential to confirmation upon successful completion of two years probation. . Â

On behalf of respondent, Municipal Board, reply is submitted. Precisely, in the reply Municipal Board has averred that an FIR No.11/2015 was

registered with the Anti-Corruption Bureau against members of the Selection Committee regarding certain irregularities or illegalities committed during

the course of selection process.  For non-issuance of confirmation orders vis-a vis petitioners Municipal Board has taken shelter of the pending

investigation in the FIR aforesaid.  It is further averred in the reply that petitioners are beneficiaries of a selection process which is subject matter

of investigation for alleged illegalities and irregularities, therefore, uptil conclusion of investigation reliefs cannot be granted to them.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Lokesh Mathur, that after thorough investigation in the aforesaid FIR, Anti-Corruption

Bureau has submitted negative final report on 25.07.2018 before Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption Act), Jodhpur.   Learned counsel

would contend that in the negative Final Report investigating agency has not found any illegality or irregularity in the selection process much less

cogent prima facie evidence against the members of the Selection Committee for constituting charged offences. Learned counsel has, therefore, urged

that petitioners are entitled for confirmation and other service benefits upon successful completion of probation as per Rule 11 and 14 of the Rules

of 2012. Learned counsel Mr. Mathur for substantiating this plea has also placed on record certified copy of the order-sheet dated 25.07.2018 of

Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption Act), Jodhpur as well as negative Final Report submitted by the investigating agency.

Per contra, learned counsel for Municipal Board has opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners. However, learned counsel

for Municipal Board has not disputed factum of completion of investigation and submission of negative Final Report.  Learned counsel has further

urged that complainant has submitted a protest petition against the negative Final Report.

I have bestowed my considerations to the arguments advanced at Bar.

Upon perusal of the materials available on record, it is abundantly clear that the appointment order Annex.1 was issued by the Executive Officer,

Municipal Board, Phalodi pursuant to selection of all the petitioners as Safai Employees.  It is not in dispute that petitioners are discharging their

duties as Safai Employees with the Municipal Board, Phalodi since February/March 2014Â and completed their probation period of two years in the

year 2016.  From the reply submitted on behalf of respondent Municipal Board, it is abundantly clear that there was no complaint against the

petitioners during probation period and their performance was satisfactory.  In substance, the only plea sought to be raised by the Municipal Board

is pending investigation in the aforesaid FIR for not confirming the petitioners and allowing them other service benefits. I am at loss to say that the

grounds set out in the reply cannot defeat the mandate of Rule 11 of the Rules of 2012, which envisage with clarity and precision that in the event of

satisfactory performance unquestionable integrity and otherwise found by the appointing authority fit the incumbent employee is liable to be

confirmed. In want of any whisper in the reply about lack of satisfactory performance of any of the petitioners or regarding their integrity and

otherwise fitness, in my view mere pendency of investigation in a case cannot be a plausible ground to deny them benefit of confirmation and other

service benefits. It is also noteworthy that now in the wake of changed circumstances when investigating agency has submitted negative Final

Report so as to conclude that there was illegality or irregularity in the selection process much less prima facie evidence about the commission of

alleged offences by any of the members of the Selection Committee, denial of confirmation and other benefits flowing from that status is highly unjust,

arbitrary and unreasonable.

In view of foregoing discussion, the instant writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to pass appropriate orders qua petitioners under

Rule 11 of the Rules of 2012 for their confirmation and further allow them other service benefits flowing from their status as confirmed Safai

Employee. The respondents are directed complete the entire process within a period of two months from today.