Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Raichand Meena vs State Of Rajasthan (2023:Rj-Jd:43683) on 14 December, 2023
[2023:RJ-JD:43683]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9041/2023
1. Raichand Meena S/o Late Shri Shonath, Aged About 68
Years, Village Kala Bhata, Amarwasi, Tehsil Jahajpur,
District Bhilwara (Raj.).
2. Smt. Sohan Devi W/o Late Shri Madan Lal Porwal, Aged
About 78 Years, Old Hospital Road, Banera, District
Bhilwara (Raj.).
3. Bhairu Lal Sharma S/o Late Shri Hari Shankar Sharma,
Aged About 44 Years, Cpo Kudia, Po Reed, Tehsil Kotri,
District Bhilwara (Raj.).
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary To The
Government, Medical And Health Department,
Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.).
2. Director, Medical Health And Family Welfare Department,
Sawasthya Bhawan, Jaipur.
3. Additional Director (Admn.), Department Of Medical And
Health, Swasthya Bhawan, Jaipur.
4. Chief Medical And Health Officer, Bhilwara.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pushkar Tamini.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. K.S. Rajpurohit, AAG.
Mr. Lucky Rajpurohit.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA
Order
14/12/2023
1. Learned counsel for both the parties are ad idem that
controversy raised in the present petition is no more res integra
since the same has already been adjudicated by the Apex Court in
case title State of Rajasthan v. Jagdish Narain Chaturvedi: (2009)
12 SCC 49 i.e. the benefits of pay fixation and other consequential
benefits arising therefrom are to be conferred w.e.f. the date of
his appointment.
2. Furthermore, even this Court subsequently had an occasion
to deal with similarly situated employees of the Health and Family
Welfare Department of State of Rajasthan in case title Govind Dan
[2023:RJ-JD:43683] (2 of 2) [CW-9041/2023]
Charan v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.: D.B. Civil Special Appeal
(Writ) No.1068/2014. The said Division Bench rendition has since
attained finality as an SLP filed by the State against the same was
dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide an order dated
12.7.2016.
3. In view of the aforesaid, coupled with the facts that both the
learned counsel state that there no quibble that the case of the
petitioner is squarely covered by the judgments ibid, I see no
reason as to why benefit of the same be not accorded to the
petitioner in the same terms.
4. Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of in the same terms of
judgment rendered in Govind Dan Charan ibid.
5. In the parting, I may like to clarify that in case there is any
dispute with regard to effective date of regularization of the
petitioner, the Department, which is since ceased all service record
of the petitioner, shall determine his effective date of
regularization on the post, he was originally regularized /
appointed. The department shall convey the same to the LRs of
the petitioner (since deceased) and confer the benefits w.e.f. same
date.
6. Needless to say that in case the LRs of the petitioner have
any grievance with regard to the date of regularization of the
petitioner, they shall be at liberty to take legal recourse to the
same.
(ARUN MONGA),J
2-Sumit/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
