Rajasthan High Court
Smt. Anuradha Sharma Wife Of Shri ... vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 12 February, 2024
Author: Sameer Jain
Bench: Sameer Jain
[2024:RJ-JP:7208]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 20474/2023
Smt. Anuradha Sharma Wife Of Shri Rajendra Sharma, Aged
About 60 Years, Retired Lady Supervisor, Office Of Child
Development Project Officer- Anta, District Baran And Resident
Of Maruti Nagar, Near Hanuman Temple, Ramganj Mandi, District
Kota (Raj).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Additional Chief
Secretary To The Government, Department Of Women
And Child Development, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Integrated Child Development Services
(Icds), Directorate, Departmetn Of Women And Child
Development, 2, Jalpath, Gandhi Nagar, Jaipur.
3. The Director, Department Of Pension And Pensioners
Welfare, Directorate- Pension, Pension Bhawan, Jyoti
Nagar, Jaipur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashish Saksena
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajendra Soni, AAG with
Mr. S.M. Sharma
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN
Order
12/02/2024
1. At the outset, learned counsel for the respondent has raised a preliminary objection regarding the prayer nos.1 and 2, not being covered by the settled dictum of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Ramesh Chander Gupta vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2800/2021; decided on 17.10.2023).
(Downloaded on 19/02/2024 at 09:00:26 PM) [2024:RJ-JP:7208] (2 of 4) [CW-20474/2023]
2. Accordingly, learned counsel for the petitioner has not pressed upon prayer nos. 1 and 2. However, he has sought liberty to subsequently press upon the said prayers, by way of a fresh petition.
3. Liberty as prayed for, is granted.
4. While pressing upon Prayer Nos. 3,4,5 and 6, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in the present matter is no more res integra in view of judgment of Division Bench of this Court in the case of Ramesh Chander Gupta vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2800/2021; decided on 17.10.2023). It is further submitted that in similar facts and circumstances, the order of the Division Bench has also been followed by Co-ordinate Bench in the case of Ramesh Chand vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19121/2023; decided on 07.12.2023).
5. Learned counsel for the respondent does not dispute the fact that the issue, as raised in the present writ petition, is similar to Ramesh Chander Gupta (supra). However, it is contended that the petitioner has approached the Court at a belated stage.
6. Heard and considered.
7. The fact that the issue involved is covered by Division Bench of this Court in case of Ramesh Chander Gupta (supra) remains undisputed. The contention that the petitioner has approached the Court with a little delay is of no relevancy in the facts and circumstances as matters of salary and pension have a recurring cause of action, as was held by the Hon'ble Supreme (Downloaded on 19/02/2024 at 09:00:26 PM) [2024:RJ-JP:7208] (3 of 4) [CW-20474/2023] Court in Rushibhai Jagdishbhai Pathak vs. Bhavnagar Municipal Corporation: 2022 (4) SLR 862 (SC).
8. In the case of Ramesh Chander Gupta (supra), Di- vision Bench of this Court inter-alia while referring to orders passed in Union of India & Ors. vs. Manohar Lal & Ors. (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5445/2022; decided on 07.08.2023) & the Commissioner, Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan & Anr. vs. Ram Karan Bhakar & Ors. (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4139/2022) as well as judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of The Director (Admn. and HR) KPTCL & Ors. vs. C.P. Mundinamani & Ors.: 2023 SCC OnlineSC 401 has passed the following directions:-
"It is also brought to the notice of this Court that Special Leave Petition (C) No.3420/2023 and Special Leave Petition (C) No.1001/2023 have also been dis- posed off on 19.05.2023. A copy of orders dated 11.04.2023 and 19.05.2023 passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court have also been placed on record. Therefore, the present petitions are also disposed off on the same terms with direction to the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioners and pass ap- propriate orders and other consequential benefits as per their entitlement. Whatever amount is found payable be also released within a period of one month. Accordingly, the present petitions are dis-posed of."
9. In view of the joint statement of the learned counsel for the parties, this Court deems it just and proper to dispose of this writ petition on the same terms and with direction to the respondents to consider the petitioners' claim and pass appropriate orders in the light of the Division Bench judgment, as referred to above, within a period of two months. (Downloaded on 19/02/2024 at 09:00:26 PM)
[2024:RJ-JP:7208] (4 of 4) [CW-20474/2023]
10. Accordingly, in view of the above, the instant petition is disposed of.
(SAMEER JAIN),J JKP/s-613 (Downloaded on 19/02/2024 at 09:00:27 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)