Murlidhar Gahlot vs The State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 10806 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Murlidhar Gahlot vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 15 December, 2023

Author: Pushpendra Singh Bhati

Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati

[2023:RJ-JD:43891]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                  S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19021/2023

1.       Murlidhar Gahlot S/o Shri Ram Sukh Gahlot, Aged About
         68 Years, Resident Of Sukh Laxmi, 14848, Shakti Nagar,
         Road No. 6C, Ward No. 54, Jodhpur.
2.       Hemant Kumar Ameta S/o Shri Bhawani Shankar Ameta,
         Aged About 66 Years, Resident Of F 22, Haridas Ji Ki
         Magri, Mulla Talai, Udaipur.
3.       Prakash Chandra Bhatt S/o Shri Nathuram Ji Bhatt, Aged
         About 67 Years, Resident Of Gamothawara, Sagwara,
         Dungerpur.
4.       Nand Kishore Solanki S/o Shri Devi Lal Solanki, Aged
         About       74    Years,        Resident       Of     4/15,     Mahi    Colony,
         Banswara, District Banswara.
5.       Om Prakash Patidar S/o Shri Nanu Ram, Aged About 72
         Years,      Resident       Of     2-D-17,       Housing        Board    Colony,
         Banswara, District Banswara.
6.       Chandra Shankar Dwivedi S/o Shri Har Lal Dwivedi, Aged
         About 72 Years, Resident Of 1-B, Shivam Gali No. No. 03,
         Reti Talai, District Banswara.
                                                                         ----Petitioners
                                          Versus
1.       The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Water
         And Resource Department, Government Of Rajasthan,
         Jaipur.
2.       The Executive Engineer, Quality Control Division, Water
         Resources Department, Banswara.
3.       The Executive Engineer, Bhikha Bhai, Sagwada, Canal
         Division, Mahi Project, Sagwada, District Dungerpur.
4.       The Deputy Director, Pension And Pensioners Welfare
         Department, Udaipur.
5.       The       Additional         Chief       Engineer,           Water     Resource
         Department, Udaipur.
6.       The Assistant Engineer, Bandh Sub-Division Ii, Mahi
         Project, Bagidaura, District Banswara.
                                                                       ----Respondents




                          (Downloaded on 16/12/2023 at 08:42:13 PM)
 [2023:RJ-JD:43891]                           (2 of 3)                      [CW-19021/2023]




For Petitioner(s)                 :       Ms. Ayushi Solanki



      HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

Order

15/12/2023

1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits 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".

2. Learned counsel, therefore, prays that the petitioners may

be permitted to file a detailed representation before the

competent authorities for redressal of their grievances.

3. In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed

with liberty to the petitioner to file a representation to the

[2023:RJ-JD:43891] (3 of 3) [CW-19021/2023]

competent authorities of the department and the competent

authorities of the department are directed to decide the same

within a period of three months 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).

4. 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 petitioner

would be entitled to the relief.

(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J 15-Zeeshan

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)