Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Hanuman Prasad vs The State Of Rajasthan on 10 February, 2022
Bench: Sandeep Mehta, Rekha Borana
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6268/2020
1. Hanuman Prasad S/o Ram Prasad, Aged About 55 Years,
R/o Kissan Chatravas Ke Pass, War No. - 30, Didwana,
Nagour.
2. Devi Lal Kuldeep S/o Purna Ram Kuldeep, Aged About 56
Years, R/o Khuradiya Mohalla, Ward No. 57, Barali,
Nagour.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary,
Department Of Finance, Government Of Rajasthan,
Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,
Department Of Personnel And Training, Government Of
Rajasthan, Jaipur.
3. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,
Department Of Law, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
4. The Director, Department Of Prosecution, Government Of
Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
5. The Additional Director, Department Of Prosecution,
Government Of Rajasthan, Didwana/ Nagour.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : None present.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sandeep Shah, Sr. Advocate &
AAG, assisted by Mr. Abhimanyu
Singh Rathore.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA
Judgment / Order
10/02/2022
Issue notice.
Shri Sandeep Shah, learned Sr. Advocate and AAG appears
on behalf of the respondents. Thus, service is complete.
(2 of 3) [CW-6268/2020]
This writ petition calls into question the action of the
respondents in proposing to effect recoveries from the petitioners
Government servants as a consequence of the notification dated
30th October, 2017 issued by the State Government.
Identical controversy was examined and decided by a
Coordinate Division Bench of this Court vide order dated
25.11.2021 passed in a bunch of writ petitions led by Santosh
Sharma vs State of Rajasthan (D.B. Civil Writ Petition
No.5920/2021) observing as below:-
"Today, when this group of petitions was taken up for
hearing, the learned Advocate General tendered an affidavit
dated 25th November 2021 filed by one Shri Mangi Lal,
Officer-in-Charge of the respondents, in which it is stated
that the State Government is considering all the issues with
respect to the notification and for such purpose a Committee
has been constituted under order dated 05.08.2021. The
scope of this Committee involves other issues but one of
them being the question of grant of ACP benefits to the
Government employees. It is stated that such Committee will
take into account the issues arising out the amendments
made by notification dated 30th October, 2017. According to
the learned Advocate General, this will take about three
months time. Till then, no further recoveries would be made
on the basis of the said notification.
In our opinion, when the Government, on its own, is
considering the multiple issues arising out of the said
notification, it would not be proper on our part to examine
the legality and validity of the notification. We would
therefore dispose of these petitions with certain directions.
Before issuing final directions, we may notice that in some of
the cases of the pensioners, part or full recoveries have
already been made. These recoveries may not be retained by
the State till fresh decision is taken, of course,
subject to outcome of the decision of the Government and
further order of the Court in case the controversy raises.
Under the circumstances, all these petitions are
disposed of with the following directions:-
(i) Let the Government reconsider the entire issue as is
stated before us. Final decision preferably may be taken by
28th February, 2022.
(3 of 3) [CW-6268/2020]
(ii) After the decision is taken by the Government, if any of
the grievances of the petitioners survive, it would be open
for them to file fresh petitions.
(iii) Till fresh decision is taken, the State Government shall
not make any further recovery on the basis of the
notification dated 30th October, 2017.
(iv) Recoveries already made from the pensioners would be
refunded, subject to final decision of the Government,
subject to further challenge.
We are informed that in some of the petitions additional
issues have also been raised. None of these issues would get
affected by this order. It would be open for the petitioners to
file an independent petition, as may be advised subject to all
objections of the Government which are kept open."
In view of the fact that the controversy involved in this writ
petition is ad idem, the matter is disposed of in light of the above
order.
There is no order as to costs.
(REKHA BORANA),J (SANDEEP MEHTA),J
21-Sudhir/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
