Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Kishan Chand Gupta vs State Of Rajasthan (2023:Rj-Jd:41524) on 1 December, 2023
Author: Kuldeep Mathur
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
[2023:RJ-JD:41524]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18495/2023
1. Kishan Chand Gupta S/o Phool Chand Gupta, Aged About
71 Years, Mori Char Bagh, Bharatpur, Rajasthan.
2. Sushil Kumar S/o R.p. Mathur, Aged About 68 Years, 90-
61, Patel Marg, Mansarovar, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
3. Devi Shankar Sharma S/o Bhonri Lal Sharma, Aged About
75 Years, 9, Mehandi Bagh, Karauli Kund Road, Alwar,
Rajasthan.
4. Mahavir Prasad Bhatt S/o Suraj Mal Bhatt, Aged About 61
Years, P.no. 04, Kalyan Nagar, Vki Road No. 3, Jaipur,
Rajasthan.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Chief Secretary,
Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Finance
Secretary, Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
3. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary To The
Government, Department Of Personnel, Govt. Of
Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
4. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary And
Commissioner, Department Of Agriculture, Pant Krishi
Bhawan, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
5. The Director, Treasury And Accounts Department,
Rajasthan, Jaipur.
6. The Director, Department Of Pension And Pensioners
Welfare, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
7. The Director, Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.
8. The Director, Sanskrit Education, Shiksha Sankul, Jaipur.
9. The Chairman Cum Managing Director (Convener And
Controller, Exam), Jaipur Vidyut Nigam Limited, Vidyut
Bhawan, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur, Raj.
10. The Chief Personal Officer, Jaipur Vidyut Nigam Limited,
Vidyut Bhawan, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur, Raj.
11. The Secretary (Admn.), Jaipur Vidyut Nigam Limited,
Vidyut Bhawan, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur, Raj.
(Downloaded on 01/12/2023 at 08:55:44 PM)
[2023:RJ-JD:41524] (2 of 3) [CW-18495/2023]
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Hansraj Nimbar.
For Respondent(s) : -
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
Order
01/12/2023
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the
controversy involved in the present case is squarely covered by a
judgment dated 21.07.2023 of this Court at Jaipur Bench rendered
in batch of writ petition led by S.B. Civil Writ Petition
No.21/2020 (Vijay Singh vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.). The
operative part of the said order reproduced as under :-
"41. Hence, looking to the binding effect of above
judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of C.P.
Mundinamani(supra) and All India Judges
Association (supra), it is held that the petitioners
would be entitled to get the benefits of increment
falling due on 1st July on account of their conduct
for the requisite length of time i.e. one year. The
petitioners would be entitled to get notional
payment on 1st July, notwithstanding their
superannuation on 30th June.
42. The respondents are directed to consider the
case of the petitioners afresh in the light of the
observations made hereinabove and thereafter grant
notional increment to the petitioners. The
petitioners' pension would consequently be refixed.
The appropriate orders be issued and the arrears of
pension be paid to the petitioners within a period of
three months from the date of receipt of certified
copy of this order.
[2023:RJ-JD:41524] (3 of 3) [CW-18495/2023]
43. With the aforesaid directions, all these petitions
stand disposed of.
44. Stay applications and all applications (pending, if
any) also stand disposed of".
Learned counsel, therefore, prays that the petitioners may
be permitted to file a detailed representation before the
competent authorities for redressal of their grievances.
In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed
with liberty to the petitioners to file a representation to the
competent authorities of the department and the competent
authorities of the department are directed to decide the same
within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of such
representation, keeping in mind the law laid down by this Court in
the case of Vijay Singh (supra).
Stay application also 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
petitioners would be entitled to the relief.
(KULDEEP MATHUR),J
40-Tikam/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
