Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Sazid Hussain vs Rajasthan State Agricultural ... on 17 February, 2023
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
[2023/RJJD/005844]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2809/2023
Sazid Hussain S/o Abdul Ajij, Aged About 45 Years, R/o 2-Gh-3,
Ek Minar Masjid, Chawani, Kota, Rajasthan
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Rajasthan State Agricultural Marketing Board, Through
The Administrator, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. The General Manager (Administration), Rajasthan State
Agricultural Marketing Board, Panth Krishi Bhawan, Jaipur,
Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kanishk Singhvi
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
17/02/2023
Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the very outset,
submits that the controversy raised in the instant writ application
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.: SBCWP 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.
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
(Downloaded on 23/02/2023 at 11:39:12 PM)
[2023/RJJD/005844] (2 of 3) [CW-2809/2023]
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."
Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that at this
stage, the petitioner will be satisfied if the State respondents are
directed to decide the representation of the petitioner, within a
time frame, which they are ready and willing to address within a
period of two weeks.
In view of the limited prayer addressed; the instant writ
proceedings are closed with a direction to the petitioner to address
a comprehensive representation within two weeks hereinafter,
(Downloaded on 23/02/2023 at 11:39:12 PM)
[2023/RJJD/005844] (3 of 3) [CW-2809/2023]
enclosing a copy of the judgment, which has been referred to and
relied upon in support of his claim.
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.
Upon consideration of the representation so filed, if
respondents find the case of the petitioner to be covered by the
judgment(s) aforesaid, before giving actual benefits, an
undertaking shall be procured from the petitioner to the effect that
his rights/entitlements shall be subservient to the fate of the
judgment(s) aforesaid and in case the same is reversed or
modified in any manner, he shall also be liable for restitution of
any benefits/emoluments so received.
With the observations and directions, as indicated above, the
writ petition stands disposed of.
The stay application is also disposed of.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.
252-Zeeshan
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
