Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Mool Singh vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 16 February, 2024
Author: Dinesh Mehta
Bench: Dinesh Mehta
[2024:RJ-JD:8164] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1929/2024 Mool Singh S/o Shri Khushal Singh, Aged About 72 Years, R/o Kojaniyo Ki Dhani, Langera, District Barmer, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Forests And Environment, Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Principal Chief Conservator Of Forests (Hoff), Rajasthan, Jaipur.
3. The Deputy Conservator Of Forest, Forests And Environment, Barmer, Rajasthan.
4. The Assistant Director, Pension And Pensioners Welfare Department, Jodhpur, Rajasthan.
5. The District Treasury Officer, Pension And Pensioners Welfare Department, Barmer, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vinay Baghmar
For Respondent(s) : -
JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
Order
16/02/2024
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
controversy involved in the present case is squarely covered by a judgment dated 21.07.2023 passed by this Court at Jaipur Bench rendered in a batch of writ petitions led by S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.21/2020 (Vijay Singh vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.). The operative part of the said order is reproduced as under:-
(Downloaded on 16/02/2024 at 10:04:19 PM)[2024:RJ-JD:8164] (2 of 3) [CW-1929/2024] "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".
2. Learned counsel, therefore, prays that the petitioner may be permitted to file a detailed representation before the competent authorities for redressal of their grievances.
3. 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 16/02/2024 at 10:04:19 PM) [2024:RJ-JD:8164] (3 of 3) [CW-1929/2024] 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).
4. 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 petitioners would be entitled to the relief.
5. The stay application also stands disposed of accordingly.
(DINESH MEHTA),J 15-akansha/-
(Downloaded on 16/02/2024 at 10:04:19 PM)Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)