Thursday, 23, Apr, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Udai Lal vs State Of Rajasthan (2023:Rj-Jd:42927)
2023 Latest Caselaw 10573 Raj

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 10573 Raj
Judgement Date : 11 December, 2023

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Udai Lal vs State Of Rajasthan (2023:Rj-Jd:42927) on 11 December, 2023

Author: Pushpendra Singh Bhati

Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati

[2023:RJ-JD:42927]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18813/2023

Udai Lal S/o Shri Shankar Lal Jeengar, Aged About 45 Years, R/o
Village And Post Singhpur, Tehsil Kapasan, District Chittorgarh.
(Raj.) At Present Posted As An Head Constable No. 65 At District
Bhilwara (Raj.).
                                                                          ----Petitioner
                                         Versus
1.       State       Of   Rajasthan,          Through         Its     Additional   Chief
         Secretary, Department Of Home Affairs, Government Of
         Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur, (Raj.).
2.       The Director General Of Police, Rajasthan Lalkothi, Jaipur,
         (Raj.).
3.       Inspector General Of Police Udaipur, Range Udaipur,
         (Raj.).
4.       Superintendent Of Police, Bhilwara, (Raj.).
                                                                       ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)              :     Mr. Vinod Pathak
For Respondent(s)              :



      HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

Order

11/12/2023

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the very outset,

submits that the controversy raised in the instant writ petition

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.: SB CWP 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.

[2023:RJ-JD:42927] (2 of 3) [CW-18813/2023]

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 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 would further submits that

at this stage, the petitioner would be satisfied if the State-

respondents are directed to decide the representation of the

petitioner, within a time frame, which he is ready and willing.

[2023:RJ-JD:42927] (3 of 3) [CW-18813/2023]

4. In view of the limited prayer addressed; the instant writ

proceedings are closed with a direction to the petitioner is allowed

to address a comprehensive representation within two weeks

hereinafter, enclosing a copy of the judgment, which has referred

to and relied upon in support of his claim.

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. With the observations and directions, as indicated above, the

writ petition stands disposed off. All pending applications, if any,

stand disposed of.

(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J 22-/Jitender//-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IDRC

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter