Asharam Pandiya vs State Of Rajasthan (2023:Rj-Jd:42937)
2023 Latest Caselaw 10563 Raj

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 10563 Raj
Judgement Date : 11 December, 2023

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Asharam Pandiya vs State Of Rajasthan (2023:Rj-Jd:42937) on 11 December, 2023

Author: Pushpendra Singh Bhati

Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati

[2023:RJ-JD:42937]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12668/2020

Asharam Pandiya S/o Shri Jainarayan Ji, Aged About 72 Years,
Resident Of - 98, Main Road, Ward No. 2, Near Hanuman
Temple, Ramsar, District-Bikaner.
                                                                     ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary,
         Public Health And Engineering Department, Government
         Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2.       The    Additional    Chief       Engineer,        Public    Health   And
         Engineering Department, Bikaner Region, Bikaner.
3.       The     Superintending         Engineer,         Public    Health    And
         Engineering Department, Bikaner Circle, Bikaner.
4.       The Assistant Engineer, Public Health And Engineering
         Department,      Rural       Sub-Division-I,            Nokha,   District-
         Bikaner.
                                                                  ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. R.S. Saluja
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Mohit Singh Choudhary for
                                Ms. Anjana Jawa, Dy.G.C.



      HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

Order

11/12/2023

1. Learned counsel for the parties jointly submit that the

controversy involved in the present writ petition is no more res-

integra and it is covered by the decision rendered by a coordinate

Bench of this Hon'ble Court in Tej Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan

: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.15048/2022 on 14.12.2022. The

order reads as follows:

"1. After arguing for some time, Mr. Purohit, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner would

[2023:RJ-JD:42937] (2 of 2) [CW-12668/2020]

be satisfied if the respondents are directed to consider his representation, which he would be filing (within a period of 15 days from today) in the light of judgment rendered by this Court in Sohan Lal Mathur Vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3631/2008), decided on 17.11.2008, which has subsequently been confirmed up till the Hon'ble Apex Court in SLP No.14932/2012.

2. The writ petition is, therefore, disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to file representation indicating the pay scale which he claims along with a copy of the judgment dated 17.11.2018 rendered in the case of Sohan Lal Mathur (supra) and a certified copy of the order instant within a period of two weeks from today.

3. If such representation is so addressed, the competent authority shall consider the same and do the needful in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks thereafter.

4. It is made clear that aforesaid direction to decide the petitioner's representation has been issued only with a view to ensure expeditious redressal of petitioner's grievance. The same may not be construed to be an order to decide the representation in a particular manner.

5. Stay application too stands disposed of."

2. Accordingly, this writ petition is also disposed of in the light

of the decision rendered vide order dated 14.12.2022 passed in

Tej Singh's case (supra) in the same terms, while giving liberty

liberty to the petitioner to file the representation, which shall be

decided by the respondents, strictly in accordance with law. All

pending applications also stand disposed of.

(DR. PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.

34-Zeeshan