Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Bhuvanesh Kumar vs State Of Rajasthan on 18 July, 2022
Bench: Arun Bhansali
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8680/2022
Mohan Singh S/o Shri Horeelal, Aged About 40 Years, Resident
Of Village Barada, Post Sonkh, Tehsil Kathumar, District Alwar
(Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of
Home Affairs, Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan).
2. Director General Of Police Headquarter Rajasthan Police,
Jaipur (Rajasthan).
3. Superintendent Of Police, Bhilwara (Rajasthan).
----Respondents
Connected With
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8697/2022
Bhuvanesh Kumar S/o Shri Govind Ram, Aged About 25 Years,
Resident Of Village Siryari, Tehsil Marwar Junction, District Pali
(Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of
Home Affairs, Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan).
2. Director General Of Police Headquarter Rajasthan Police,
Jaipur (Rajasthan).
3. Superintendent Of Police, Pali (Rajasthan).
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8702/2022
Dilkhush Labana S/o Ramesh Chandra Labana, Aged About 25
Years, Village Mata Tanda, Lodi Mandvi, Tehsil Dhariyawad,
District Pratapgarh (Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department
Of Home Affairs, Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan).
2. Director General Of Police, Headquarter Rajasthan Police,
Jaipur (Rajasthan).
(2 of 4) [CW-8680/2022]
3. Superintendent Of Police, Pratapgarh (Rajasthan).
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8725/2022
Chhota Ram S/o Sagra Ram, Aged About 42 Years, Village
Jalkha, Tehsil Pipar City, District Jodhpur. (Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of
Home Affairs, Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan).
2. Director General Of Police, Headquarter Rajasthan Police,
Jaipur (Rajasthan).
3. Superintendent Of Police, Pali (Rajasthan).
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8825/2022
Indu Goshwami D/o Shri Santosh Puri Goswami, Aged About 29
Years, Village Damadi, Tehsil And District Dungarpur (Raj.).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of
Home Affairs, Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan).
2. Director General Of Police Headquarter Rajasthan Police,
Jaipur (Rajasthan).
3. Superintendent Of Police, Dungarpur (Rajasthan).
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8845/2022
Ramandeep Kaur D/o Shri Rajendra Singh, Aged About 27 Years,
Resident Of Village Ward No. 01, Amarpura Rathan, 33 Stg,
District - Hanumangarh. (Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of
Home Affairs, Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan).
2. Director General Of Police, Headquarter Rajasthan Police,
Jaipur (Rajasthan).
3. Superintendent Of Police, Shri Ganganagar. (Rajasthan).
----Respondents
(3 of 4) [CW-8680/2022]
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. O.P. Sangwa.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manish Vyas, AAG.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI
Order
18/07/2022
These writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners
seeking directions to the respondents to refund the recovered
amount from the petitioners on account of salary, allowance and
training expenses alongwith interest @ 9% p.a.
Learned counsel for the petitioners made submissions that
the issue raised in the present writ petition is squarely covered by
a judgment in Arun Choudhary & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan &
Ors.: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5255/2013, decided on
11.08.2014 at Jaipur Bench and, therefore, the present writ
petition may also be decided in light of and with similar directions
as given in the case of Arun Choudhary (supra).
Learned AAG made submissions that though the issue raised
is squarely covered by judgment in the case of Arun Choudhary
(supra) but as another similar nature order passed by this Court is
pending consideration before the Divsion Bench in D.B. Special
Appeal (Writ) No.288/2021, wherein, effect and operation of the
order has been stayed, therefore, the hearing in the present
matter be deferred.
I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel
for the parties and have perused the material available on record.
Once it is not in dispute that the issue raised in the present
writ petition is squarely covered by the order in the case of Arun
(4 of 4) [CW-8680/2022]
Choudhary (supra), merely because an appeal arising out of an
order passed following the order in the case of Arun Choudhary
(supra) is pending consideration before the Division Bench, in
which interim order has been granted, cannot be a reason enough
for deferring the hearing of the present petition, indefinitely.
A Coordinate Bench of this Court in Nirmala Kumari v. State
of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.14864/2021,
decided on 25.10.2021, before which also identical submissions
were made, has declined similar prayer.
In view of the above fact situation, the writ petitions filed by
the petitioners are allowed. The respondents are directed to
forthwith reimburse the amount of salary (excluding the training
expenses) that was recovered from the petitioners, who have
resigned to join other State services. The respondents would also
be required to pay interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of recovery
till the date of actual payment.
Needful may done by the respondents within a period of two
months from the date of this order.
(ARUN BHANSALI),J
227-232-pradeep/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
