Dhai Devi vs State And Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 14132 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12756/2017

Dhai Devi W/o Lt. Virdha Ram, R/o V/P Shiv, Barmer, Rajasthan.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State of Rajasthan through the Chief Secretary Govt. of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

2. State Of Rajasthan through the Secretary Department of Finance Secretariat Jaipur.

3. The Additional Director Administration, Medical and Health Services, Health Bhawan, Jaipur.

4. The Chief Medical and Health Officer, Barmer.

5. Block Chief Health Officer, District Barmer.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Surendra Bagmalani For Respondent(s) : Ms. Vrinda Samdani for Ms. Vandana Bhansali

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

Order

01/12/2022

It is submitted by learned counsel for the

petitioner that the present writ petition is squarely

covered by the Division Bench Judgment of this Court

in Govind Dan Charan v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.: D.B.

Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No.1068/2014 decided

on 17.12.2015, against which Special Leave Petition

filed by the State has also been dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme

Court vide order dated 12.7.2016 and therefore, the writ petition

be allowed and the petitioner/s be granted relief as granted in the

case of Govind Dan Charan (supra).

(2 of 3) [CW-12756/2017]

Learned counsel for the respondent-State submits that

though the issue raised in the present writ petition is squarely

covered by the judgment of this Court in the case of Govind Dan

Charan (supra), however, it is submitted that as the petitioner/s

have raised the issue belatedly, the material relief to

him/them be restricted.

Reliance has been placed in the judgment of Hon'ble

Supreme Court Union of India & Ors. v. Tarsem Singh :

(2008) 8 SCC 648.

In so far as the relief being claimed by the petitioner/s is

concerned, there is no dispute that the same is governed by the

law laid down by this Court in the case of Govind Dan Charan

(supra).

In so far as the plea raised by the respondents is concerned,

a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Ramchandra Sharma v.

The State of Rajasthan & Ors. : SBCWP No.11254/2016

decided on 7.10.2016 dealing with another writ petition of

identical nature after noticing the submissions of learned counsel

for the respondents held as under:-

"A perusal of the judgment rendered by the Apex Court in the case of Union of India (supra) shows that the same does not apply to the facts of the present case. In the present case, no third party rights have been affected. It pertains to a financial loss which is a continuing injury to the petitioners.

It is apparent that in the case of Govind Dan Charan, the order has been passed on 17 th December, 2015 and the orders passed in identical matters have already been implemented by the Department in the connected writ petitions."

(3 of 3) [CW-12756/2017]

In view thereof, the submissions made by learned counsel

appearing for the respondents regarding restricting the relief to

the petitioner cannot be countenanced.

Accordingly, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is allowed

and it is directed that the petitioner would be entitled to selection

grade and get fixation in the pay-scale of Rs.975-1720, 1200-

2050 and 1640-2900 (5500-9000) on completion of 9, 18 & 27

years of service respectively in terms of the judgment in the case

of State of Rajasthan v. Jagdish Narain Chaturvedi: (2009)

12 SCC 49 i.e. from the date of regular appointment.

The required exercise would be completed by the

respondents within a period of three months from the

date of this judgment.

(REKHA BORANA),J 28-Dharmendra/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)