Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Durga Devi vs State Of Rajasthan on 16 July, 2021
Bench: Dinesh Mehta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13064/2020
Durga Devi W/o Late Shri Babulal Joshi, Aged About 56 Years,
Presently Residing At Kodhiya Colony, Ramdevra, Tehsil Pokran,
District Jaisalmer (Raj.).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Department Of
Medical And Health, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat,
Jaipur.
2. The Director (Non-Gazzetted), Medical And Health
Services, Health Bhawan, Jaipur.
3. The Chief Medical And Health Officer, Pali.
4. The Block Chieff Medical Officer, Jaitaran, District Pali.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Yash Pal Khileree
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Vandana Bhansali
Mr. Idrish Mohd.
JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
Order
16/07/2021
1. The issue in the present writ petition is that, whether the
petitioner can seek voluntary retirement or is entitled to be
declared voluntarily retired after completion of three months'
notice period, as per Rule 50 of the Rajasthan Civil Services
Pension Rules, 1996.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue
involved in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the
judgment passed by this Court in Dr. Durgesh Narayan Mathur Vs.
State of Raj & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4121/2012) decided
(2 of 3) [CW-13064/2020]
on 11.09.2012 and in Dr. Mahabir Singh Vs. State of Raj. & Ors.
(S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3286/2015) decided on 14.05.2015.
3. Ms. Vandana Bhansali, learned counsel for the petitioner is
not in a position to dispute the aforesaid position of facts and law.
4. In the case of Dr. Durgesh Narayan (supra) this Court has
held as under:-
"After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I have
perused Rule 50 (1) of the Rules of 1996, which
provides right to the employee to seek voluntary
retirement. The Rule 50 (1) of the Rules of 1996 is as
follows :-
"[50. Retirement on completion of 15 years'
qualifying Service
(1) At any time after a Government servant has
completed fifteen years qualifying service, he
may, by giving notice of not less than three
months in writing to the appointing authority,
retire from service.]"
Admittedly, petitioner was appointed on the post of
Medical Officer and after completion of requisite
period, an application was filed for voluntary
retirement and according to the Rules of 1996
petitioner is very much entitled to seek voluntary
retirement, therefore, the reason mentioned in the
order of denial of acceptance of voluntary retirement
is totally illegal and contrary to the Rules of 1996.
In view of above, the order impugned is not
sustainable in law, therefore, the same is hereby
quashed and this writ petition is allowed. The
respondents are directed to treat the petitioner
voluntarily retired after expiring of period of notice
w.e.f. 19.10.2010 and grant him all retiral benefits
within a period of three months from the date of
producing certified copy of this order."
5. In view of the aforesaid, the present writ petition succeeds.
The respondents are directed to treat the petitioner voluntarily
retired after expiry of notice period i.e. w.e.f. 30.06.2019 and
grant her all retiral benefits. Needful be done within three months
of the date of presentation of certified copy of the order instant.
(3 of 3) [CW-13064/2020]
6. Petitioner's prayer for grant of medical leave made in para
(c) of the prayer clause be considered and decided separately by
the respondents in accordance with law.
7. Stay petition also stands disposed of accordingly.
(DINESH MEHTA),J
130-Ramesh/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
