Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Balvan Singh vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 10 March, 2023
Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur
[2023/RJJD/006422]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15259/2022
Balvan Singh S/o Shri Raju Singh, Aged About 24 Years,
Resident Of Village Madarpur, District - Bharatpur, (Raj.).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department
Of Home Affairs, Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan).
2. Director General Of Police, Headquarter Rajasthan Police,
Jaipur (Rajasthan).
3. The ADGP (Armed Battalion), Police Head Quarter,
Lalkothi, Jaipur (Raj.).
4. The Commandant, 7th Battalion Rajasthan Armed
Constabulary (RAC), Headquarter Bharatpur (Rajasthan).
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : None
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manish Vyas, AAG
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
Order
10/03/2023
Lawyers are abstaining from work and are not appearing
before the Court.
None present for the petitioner.
Copy of the petition has been served on Mr. Manish Vyas,
AAG.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking
directions to the respondents to refund the recovered amount
from the petitioner on account of salary, allowance and training
expenses alongwith interest @ 9% p.a.
[2023/RJJD/006422] (2 of 3) [CW-15259/2022]
It is reported that the issue raised in the present writ petition
is squarely covered by a judgment in Arun Choudhary & Ors. v.
State of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5255/2013,
decided on 11.08.2014 at Jaipur Bench.
Learned AAG made submissions that though the issue raised
is squarely covered by judgment in the case of Arun Choudhary
(supra) but as another similar nature order passed by this Court is
pending consideration before the DivIsion Bench in D.B. Special
Appeal (Writ) No.288/2021, wherein, effect and operation of the
order has been stayed, therefore, the hearing in the present
matter be deferred.
I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel
for the parties and have perused the material available on record.
Once it is not in dispute that the issue raised in the present
writ petition is squarely covered by the order in the case of Arun
Choudhary (supra), merely because an appeal arising out of an
order passed following the order in the case of Arun Choudhary
(supra) is pending consideration before the Division Bench, in
which interim order has been granted, cannot be a reason enough
for deferring the hearing of the present petition, indefinitely.
A Coordinate Bench of this Court in Nirmala Kumari v. State
of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.14864/2021,
decided on 25.10.2021, before which also identical submissions
were made, has declined similar prayer.
In view of the above fact situation, the writ petition filed by
the petitioner is allowed. The respondents are directed to forthwith
reimburse the amount of salary (excluding the training expenses)
that was recovered from the petitioner, who has resigned to join
[2023/RJJD/006422] (3 of 3) [CW-15259/2022]
other State services. The respondents would also be required to
pay interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of recovery till the date of
actual payment.
Needful may done by the respondents within a period of two
months from the date of this order.
(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J
14-/vivek/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
