Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Shri Surendra Kumar Prajapati vs State Of Rajasthan (2023:Rj-Jd:41683) on 2 December, 2023
Author: Kuldeep Mathur
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
[2023:RJ-JD:41683]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18578/2023
1. Shri Surendra Kumar Prajapati S/o Late Shri Maga Ram,
Aged About 69 Years, R/o 214, Leela Sadan Opposite
Lehariya Sweet Home, Gali No. 3 Bhagat Ki Kothi,
Jodhpur.
2. Shri Kuya Ram S/o Late Shri Daula Ram, Aged About 67
Years, R/o Meghwalo Ka Vaas Village And Post Harji,
Tehsil Ahore, District Jalore.
3. Shri Girdhari Lal S/o Late Shri Jay Narayan, Aged About
68 Years, R/o Kurdo Ka Vaas, Hariram Ji Ki Bagichi, Doli,
Tehsil Na District Jodhpur.
4. Smt. Anita Singhvi W/o Late Shri Chandra Shekhar
Singhvi, Aged About 63 Years, R/o 70, Shri Siddhi East
Patel Nagar, Ratanada, Jodhpur (Pensioner Late Shri
Chandra Shekhar Singhvi Died On 28/04/2019 And
Therefore The Petition Is Submitted Through Petitioner
Who Is Pensioner Wife, Family Pension Holder).
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Director, Directorate Of
Pension And Pensioners Welfare, Rajasthan Jyoti Nagar,
Jaipur.
2. The Principal Deputy Secretary, Agriculture (Group-1),
Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
3. Director, Agriculture Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
4. The Commissioner, Agriculture Department, Agricultural
Commissionerate, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
5. Additional Director, Agriculture (Admn.) Agricultural
Commissionarate, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
6. The Deputy Director, Agriculture (Agronomy), Atc,
Rampura, Jodhpur.
7. The Treasury Officer, Jodhpur, District Jodhpur, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Amit Sharma.
For Respondent(s) : -
(Downloaded on 02/12/2023 at 08:44:20 PM)
[2023:RJ-JD:41683] (2 of 3) [CW-18578/2023]
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
Order
02/12/2023
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.
43. With the aforesaid directions, all these petitions
stand disposed of.
44. Stay applications and all applications (pending, if
any) also stand disposed of".
[2023:RJ-JD:41683] (3 of 3) [CW-18578/2023]
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
46-Tikam/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
