Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Jitendra Kumar Sharma vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 4 April, 2023
Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur
[2023/RJJD/008529]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4068/2023
Jitendra Kumar Sharma S/o Vinod Kumar, Aged About 40 Years,
R/o Sumerganj Mandi, Bundi, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Director, Department Of
Secondary Education, Government Of Rajasthan, Bikaner,
Rajasthan.
2. The Joint Director, Department Of Education (School
Education), Kota Division, Kota, Rajasthan.
3. The Deputy Director, Department Of Education
(Secondary), Kota Division, Kota, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kanishk Singhvi
For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
Order
04/04/2023
1. 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 in case of Sardar Mal Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.:
SBCWP No. 9772/2011, decided on 7th August, 2012 and Man
Singh Hada and Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.: SBCWP No.
8124/2012, decided on 28th January, 2014.
2. 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
reinstated in service, he, as per Rule 29 of the Rajasthan Service
[2023/RJJD/008529] (2 of 3) [CW-4068/2023]
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."
3. 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.
4. In view of the limited prayer addressed; the instant writ
proceedings are closed with a direction to the petitioner to address
a comprehensive representation within two weeks hereinafter,
enclosing a copy of the judgment, which has been referred to and
relied upon in support of his claim.
[2023/RJJD/008529] (3 of 3) [CW-4068/2023]
5. 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.
6. 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 his
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, he shall also be liable for restitution of
any benefits/emoluments so received.
7. With the observations and directions, as indicated above, the
writ petition stands disposed of.
(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J
141-/Vivek/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
