Somesh Kumar Agarwal vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 7116 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6481/2022

Somesh Kumar Agarwal S/o Shri Jamuna Prasad Agarwal, Aged About 55 Years, Presenting Working As Junior Engineer, Rajasthan State Agricultural Marketing Board, Computer, Division Bhilwara.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department Of Agriculture, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

2. The Administrator, Rajasthan State Agricultural Marketing Board, Jaipur.

3. The General Managar (Administration), Rajasthan State Agricultural Marketing Board, Jaipur.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bhakti Singh for Mr. Sushil Solanki.

For Respondent(s)           :



             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI

                                       Order

12/05/2022

Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the very outset,

submits that the controversy raised in the instant writ application

stands resolved in view of the adjudication made by a Co-ordinate

Bench of this Court (at Jaipur) in case of Sardar Mal Vs. State of

Rajasthan & Ors.: SBCWP No. 9772/2011, decided on 7 th August,

2012 and Man Singh Hada and Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.:

SBCWP No. 8124/2012, decided on 28th January, 2014.

It is further contended that a Division Bench of this Court

has also observed in the case of Brij Lal Bundel Vs. State and Anr.,

that if the order of suspension is revoked and the employee is

(2 of 3) [CW-6481/2022]

reinstated in service, he, as per Rule 29 of the Rajasthan Service

Rules, is entitled to annual grade increments. Reference is also

made to the adjudication by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court

taking note of the cases aforesaid in the case of Ajeet Singh Vs.

State of Rajasthan & Ors., decided on 3rd November, 2014,

holding thus:

"Learned counsel has submitted that a division bench of this Court in Brij Lal Bundel vs. State and Another - 2007 (1) RLW 484 has also held that when the order of suspension is revoked and the employee is reinstated in service, he, as per Rule 29 of the Rajasthan Service Rules, becomes entitled to annual grade increments as the increment has to be drawn in the matter of course unless withheld. The period of suspension is normally treated as period spent on duty for the purpose of pension. If the period is treated as spent on duty, there would not be break in service and therefore there is no reason why the government servant was deprived of annual grade increments falling due in the suspension period after his reinstatement. It was held that denial of annual grade increments in such a scenario would tantamount to withholding increments, which is a penalty specified under Rule 14 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (CCA) Rules, 1958, which penalty cannot be imposed without observing the procedure envisaged in Rule 16 and 17 of the CCA Rules."

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that at this

stage, the petitioner will be satisfied if the State respondents are

directed to decide the representation of the petitioner, within a

time frame, which they are ready and willing to address within a

period of two weeks.

In view of the limited prayer addressed; the instant writ

proceedings are closed with a direction to the petitioner to address

(3 of 3) [CW-6481/2022]

a comprehensive representation within two weeks hereinafter,

enclosing a copy of the judgment, which has been referred to and

relied upon in support of their claim.

In case, a representation is so addressed within the aforesaid

period, the State-respondents are directed to consider and decide

the same by a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with

law as expeditiously as possible, however, in no case later than

three months from the date of receipt of the representation along

with a certified copy of this order.

Upon consideration of the representation so filed, if

respondents find the case of the petitioner to be covered by the

judgment(s) aforesaid, before giving actual benefits, an

undertaking shall be procured from the petitioner to the effect that

their rights/entitlements shall be subservient to the fate of the

judgment(s) aforesaid and in case the same is reversed or

modified in any manner, they shall also be liable for restitution of

any benefits/emoluments so received.

With the observations and directions, as indicated above, the

writ petition stands disposed of.

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 petitioner

would be entitled to the relief.

The stay application is also disposed of.

(ARUN BHANSALI),J 63-sumer/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)