Jainarayan Meena vs State Of Rajasthan
2023 Latest Caselaw 219 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 154/2023

1. Jainarayan Meena S/o Ramesh Chandra Meena, Aged About 61 Years, R/o Vpo Pogra Kala, Tehsil Kherwara, District Udaipur, Rajasthan.

2. Sajjan Singh Rawat S/o Chhotu Singh Rawat, Aged About 54 Years, R/o Vpo Rajothi, Wadiya Kalaliyon Ka, Ajmer, Rajasthan.

3. Hemraj Lohar S/o Moti Lal Lohar, Aged About 58 Years, R/ o Vpo Bichhiwara, Tehsil Jhadol, District Udaipur, Rajasthan.

4. Shiv Charan Gupta S/o Raghunath Prasad, Aged About 59 Years, R/o Behind Panchayat Samiti, Bandikui, District Dausa, Rajasthan.

5. Krishan Lal Sharma S/o Dulhe Ram Sharma, Aged About 59 Years, R/o 119, Krishan Kunj Villas, Gokulpura, Kalwar Road, Jhotwara, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principle Secretary, Department Of Personnel And Training Government Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. The Deputy Secretary, Department Of Administrative Reforms (Group-3), Secretariat, Jaipur.

3. The Secretary (Finance), Finance Department, State Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.

4. The Inspector General, Registration And Stamp Department, Rajasthan, Ajmer.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Hans Raj Nimbar

JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA Order

06/01/2023

1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in similar

circumstances and similar matters, the Division Bench of this

(2 of 3) [CW-154/2023]

Court in The Director, Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner

Vs. Narendra Kumar Boolchandani & Ors.; D.B. Special Appeal

Writ No.362/2020 along with connected matters, while considering

the aspect that the issue in question has arisen in large number of

cases and the Government has accepted the stand and granted

the benefits, disposed of the appeals with the following

directions:-

"Learned counsel for the petitioners, however, submitted that the issue is arising in large number of cases and in several departments, the Government has accepted the stand and granted the benefits. If the petitioners are not granted similar benefits, it would amount to discriminatory treatment. Whatever be the grievance of the petitioners they can be resolved at the level of the administration or by the Court through bipartite hearing.

In view of the peculiar circumstances, these appeals are disposed of by permitting the Government to take into account the representations already made or to be filed by any of the petitioners within one month. In the process, the authorities will bear in mind the stand taken by the department in similar cases. Such representations would be decided in accordance with law unmindful of the observations and directions issued by the learned Single Judge in the impugned orders. Eventually, if the grievances of the petitioner still survive after the Government decision, it is open for the petitioners to seeks redressal thereafter in accordance with law."

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the present

writ petition of the petitioners may also be disposed of in light of

the abovementioned judgment.

(3 of 3) [CW-154/2023]

3. In view of the submissions made, the present writ petition is

disposed of with the same directions as issued by the Division

Bench of this Court in the case of Narendra Kumar Boolchandani

(supra).

(DINESH MEHTA),J 129-Arvind/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)