Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Prahlad Singh vs State Of Rajasthan (2023:Rj-Jd:41527) on 1 December, 2023
Author: Kuldeep Mathur
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
[2023:RJ-JD:41527]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18500/2023
Prahlad Singh S/o Phool Singh, Aged About 63 Years, Village And
Post Bagri, Tehsil Laxmangarh, District Sikar, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Chief Secretary,
Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Finance
Secretary, Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
3. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary To The
Government, Department Of Personnel, Govt. Of
Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
4. The Director, Treasury And Accounts Department,
Rajasthan, Jaipur.
5. The Director, Department Of Pensioners Welfare,
Rajasthan, Jaipur.
6. The Chief Engineer, Public Works Department, Rajasthan,
Jaipur.
7. The Superintending Engineer, Public Works Department,
Circle Sikar.
8. Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Division
Engineer, District Sikar.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Hansraj Nimbar.
For Respondent(s) : -
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
Order 01/12/2023 Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the controversy involved in the present case is squarely covered by a judgment dated 21.07.2023 of this Court at Jaipur Bench rendered (Downloaded on 01/12/2023 at 08:55:46 PM) [2023:RJ-JD:41527] (2 of 3) [CW-18500/2023] in batch of writ petition led by S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.21/2020 (Vijay Singh vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.). The operative part of the said order reproduced as under :-
"41. Hence, looking to the binding effect of above judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of C.P. Mundinamani(supra) and All India Judges Association (supra), it is held that the petitioners would be entitled to get the benefits of increment falling due on 1st July on account of their conduct for the requisite length of time i.e. one year. The petitioners would be entitled to get notional payment on 1st July, notwithstanding their superannuation on 30th June.
42. The respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioners afresh in the light of the observations made hereinabove and thereafter grant notional increment to the petitioners. The petitioners' pension would consequently be refixed. The appropriate orders be issued and the arrears of pension be paid to the petitioners within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
43. With the aforesaid directions, all these petitions stand disposed of.
44. Stay applications and all applications (pending, if any) also stand disposed of".
Learned counsel, therefore, prays that the petitioner may be permitted to file a detailed representation before the competent authorities for redressal of his grievances.
In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed with liberty to the petitioner to file a representation to the competent authorities of the department and the competent authorities of the department are directed to decide the same (Downloaded on 01/12/2023 at 08:55:46 PM) [2023:RJ-JD:41527] (3 of 3) [CW-18500/2023] within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of such representation, keeping in mind the law laid down by this Court in the case of Vijay Singh (supra).
Stay application also stands disposed of. The order has been passed based on the submissions made in the petition, the respondents would be free to examine the veracity of the submissions made in the petition and only in case, the averments made therein are found to be correct, the petitioner would be entitled to the relief.
(KULDEEP MATHUR),J 41-Tikam/-
(Downloaded on 01/12/2023 at 08:55:46 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)