Salary loss due to delayed posting with respect to low rankers in selection merit.
Vinod Patidar
(Querist) 14 February 2014
This query is : Resolved
A direct recruitment exam was conducted by Rajasthan Public Sevice Commision(RPSC)for the post of Headmaster,Govt.Secondary School (A post in Rajasthan Education Service) and RPSC provisinally recommmended 1710 candidates to the department for posting in a single list.Department ordered posting of approx 1520 candidates on 13/9/2013 and those are succeed to join before January 1st,and thus eligible to get annual increment on July 1st,next year.Rest candidates not get posting orders till 10/1/2014 due to election code of conduct and other adminstrative reasons.Due to this deprived from Annual increment on 1st of july that year due to service less than six month on July 1st.Many candidates who joined after January due to delayed orders are bearing high rank in selection merit from many candidates who joined on or before January 1st.
As par rules governing Seniority, Seniority is based on Selection Merit.
Now, due to this many candidates who joined on or before 1st January and junior to many candidates who joined after 1st january,are getting more basic pay than those who are seniors,due to their high rank in merit.
Can this candidtes can claim notional benefit eqaul to those who are joined before 2nd January.
Please give reference of any court decision on similar matter.
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 14 February 2014
Entitlement of any notional benefit in above case is doubtful.
Citation is not provided in this section.
S.QAISAR ALI ADV.
(Expert) 14 February 2014
annual increments and promotions are given according to provisions of financial handbook and service rules.
Vinod Patidar
(Querist) 14 February 2014
I understand that increments and promotions are given according to provisions of financial handbook and service rules, but this is the matter of partiality aroused due to administrative reasons and not due to causes attributed to the suffering candidates.
Vinod Patidar
(Querist) 14 February 2014
I understand that increments and promotions are given according to provisions of financial handbook and service rules, but this is the matter of partiality aroused due to administrative reasons and not due to causes attributed to the suffering candidates.
Vinod Patidar
(Querist) 14 February 2014
I understand that increments and promotions are given according to provisions of financial handbook and service rules, but this is the matter of partiality aroused due to administrative reasons and not due to causes attributed to the suffering candidates.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 14 February 2014
I do agree with experts hence no more to add.
P. Venu
(Expert) 15 February 2014
There is inherent inequity if the delayed joining is attributable to the exigencies of administration. But, the situation is not covered by the extant rules of stepping up of Pay.
However, you may make a representation to the Government to grant one time increment to all those who had been similarly affected (irrespective of seniority).
T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate
(Expert) 16 February 2014
I dont think that expert Mr. Venu's suggestion will be valid, service exigency is different from the candidate not being appointed at all due to bar by the code of conduct of election, hence in my opinion, the author's claim cannot be granted or held.
P. Venu
(Expert) 17 February 2014
The Government can relax the norms and grant a one-time increment, when the inequity has arisen for no fault of the employee. There has been precedent in a similar (not identical) situation.
