1

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.4305 OF 2009 (@SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL)NO.21762 OF 2008)

Ramdan Charan Appellant(s)

                       VERSUS

Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur Respondent(s)

O R D E R

Leave granted.  Heard both sides.

2. The appellant was a Class-IV employee in the Jaipur District.  He joined  

the service in 1981. In 1982 it appears that there was a strike by the Lower Division  

Clerks of the High Court and as there was dearth of sufficient number of L.D.C.s, the  

appellant was promoted to the cadre of L.D.C. and was given an appointment as L.D.C.  

but  with  a  condition that  if  he  does  not  pass  the  requisite  test  his  service  would  be  

terminated.  The appellant could not pass the test which qualifies him as an L.D.C. and as  

he  has  failed  the  test,  the  authorities  terminated  his  service  in  the  year  1995.   The  

appellant though challenged his termination, he was not successful.  

3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the High  

Court of Rajasthan.

4.   Learned counsel for the appellant now contends that if he was not found  

suitable for the post  of L.D.C. as he had not passed the requisite test,  the authorities  

should not have treated him as out of service and he was entitled

2

to continue as a Class-IV employee.   This contention, it appears, to be fair.  Learned  

counsel for the High Court of Rajasthan contends that in the appointment order of L.D.C.  

itself stated that in case he fails to pass the test, his services would be terminated but this  

contention which has been accepted  by the High Court does not appear to be correct  

inasmuch as the person working in a lower cadre was promoted on condition on passing  

the test and if he does not pass the test, he could be reverted to the lower cadre  from  

which he was promoted but he could not be terminated from his service altogether. The  

respondent High Court is directed to reinstate the appellant as Class-IV employee within  

a period of four weeks and we make it clear that the appellant will not be entitled to any  

arrears of salary for the period he was out of service. The High Court would be at liberty  

to post him at any of the place(s) as a class-IV employee.

Appeal is disposed of accordingly.  No costs.

...............CJI. (K.G. BALAKRISHNAN)

.................J.     (P. SATHASIVAM)

.................J.     (J.M. PANCHAL)

NEW DELHI; 13TH JULY, 2009