Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Sudheer Meena vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors. ... on 12 May, 2023
Bench: Dinesh Mehta
[2023/RJJD/014886]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 60/2018
Sudheer Meena S/o Shri Gopal Meena, Resident Of Village
Mudiya Jat, Post Newara, Tehsil Weir, District Bharatpur, At
Present Resident Of Police Line, Udaipur.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan Through Its Secretary,
Department Of Home Affairs, Government Of Rajasthan,
Jaipur.
2. The Superintendent Of Police, Udaipur.
3. The District And Session Judge, Chittorgarh.
4. The Senior Civil Judge And Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Badi Sadari, District Chittorgarh.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sushil Solanki
For Respondent(s) : Mr. A.K. Bissa
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
Order
12/05/2023
1. The petitioner has approached the Court apprehending that
the respondents would demand the petitioner to refund expenses
incurred on her training and salary drawn by her during his course
of employment with the respondents.
2. The petitioner was appointed on the post of constable with
the respondents. While remaining posted as a constable, he
appeared for recruitment to the post of LDC and was appointed by
order dated 20.12.2017.
[2023/RJJD/014886] (2 of 5) [CW-60/2018]
3. Petitioner filed the present petition with a prayer that a
relieving order be passed by the respondents. On 03.01.2018 a
co-ordinate bench of this Court passed the following order:
"1. ---
2. ---
3. ---
4. In the meanwhile, the respondents are directed
to relieve the petitioner provisionally from his present
place of posting so as to enable him to join duties at
the new place of posting consequent upon his
selection as L.D.C. at his risk and peril subject to
outcome of the present writ petition."
4. Mr. Solanki learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset
submitted that in pursuance of order dated 03.01.2018 the
petitioner has been relived by the respondents, hence, the order
be made absolute.
5. He submitted that while making the order absolute the
respondents also be restrained from recovering the training
expenses and salary from the petitioner as has also been held by
a co-ordinate bench of this Court in Gorkha Ram vs State And
Ors (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 227/2017).
6. Mr. Bissa learned counsel for the respondent argued that in
the case of Gorkha Ram (supra) while relying upon SBCWP No.
5255/2013 Arun Choudhary & Ors. Vs. State & Ors. the
Court by order dated 08.09.2020 directed the respondent -
Department to reimburse the 'amount of both salary & training
expenses' amounting to Rs. 1,24,564/- recovered from the
[2023/RJJD/014886] (3 of 5) [CW-60/2018]
petitioner, whereas, in Arun Choudhary the Court had directed to
release the salary alone, while maintaining respondent-
Department's right to recover training expenses.
7. Mr. Bissa submitted that in an appeal against the Single
judge bench order in Gorkha Ram (supra), the Division Bench by
its order dated 26.08.2021 passed in D.B. Special Appeal Writ No.
288/2021 has stayed the order dated 08.09.2020 and prayed that
the respondents be permitted to recover the training expenses so
also the salary drawn by the petitioner.
8. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
9. In the case of Arun Choudhary (supra) the Court had
ordered that the petitioners' salary be released if amount of
training expense has been deposited by them. Relevant part of the
judgment reads thus:
"Having regard to the facts aforesaid especially the
latest
judgment of the coordinate bench rendered at
Principal Seat in Bhanwar Lal vs. State of Rajasthan
& Ors.,S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8934/2013 decided
on 28.1.2014, the present petitions deserve to be
disposed of with direction that if the petitioners have
already deposited the amount of training expenses as
per the circular of the Director General of Police
dated 30.9.2008, the respondent‐ Education
Department shall release their salary. The fact about
the deposit of the training expenses shall be verified
by the concerned Superintendent of Police on the
petitioners' approaching him along with copy of this
order, who shall have the training expenses
computed as per the aforesaid circular dated
30.9.2008.
[2023/RJJD/014886] (4 of 5) [CW-60/2018]
On NOC being issued by him, the Education
Department shall release the salary of the
petitioners. It is further directed that if any amount
in excess is found to have been deposited by the
petitioners or recovered from them under the head of
training expenses, the same is liable to be refunded
to the petitioners within two months. If the salary for
the earlier period has been with held by the
respondents, it shall be released within two months
too."
10. It may also be apt to refer to a co-ordinate bench judgment
of this Court in the case of Prafull Mehta (Dr.) Vs. State of
Rajasthan and Anr., in SBCWP No. 3703/2012 wherein the
Court while observing that stipend is honorarium in lieu of services
rendered by the petitioner restrained the respondents from
recovering the same when the petitioner therein had left the
course before its completion. Relevant part of the judgment reads
thus:
"22. It is settled law that every citizen is entitled to
get fair wages, remuneration and salary etc. For the
services rendered by him or her in lawful manner. If
a person is deprived of his hard earned wages or
salary by a condition of a contract, then such a
condition of this nature would defeat the provisions
of various laws. It also involves or implies injury to
the property of another. Any person paid for the
services rendered cannot be compelled to pay back
the wages, remuneration or salary received in lieu if
services rendered because the services rendered
cannot be undone by leaving the services.
...........
...........
[2023/RJJD/014886] (5 of 5) [CW-60/2018]
25. In view of the above discussion, this writ petition
is allowed and it is held that the condition of paying
the stipend back, in a case a student leaves P.G.
course before completion, is declared as void and is
hereby quashed and set aside. The respondents are
restrained from recovering the amount of stipend
paid to petitioner during post graduation course."
11. In view of the above while making the interim order
absolute, the respondents are restrained from recovering the
salary drawn by the petitioner during his course of employment
with the respondent-Department.
12. The respondents are directed to determine the amount of
training expenses incurred upon the petitioner during such course
within a period of four weeks from today and intimate the
petitioner.
13. On receipt of the determination of the amount made by the
respondents, the petitioner shall be allowed three months' time to
deposit the same.
14. On deposition of the amount of training expenses by the
petitioner, the respondent-Department shall issue a 'No Objection
Certificate' to the petitioner.
15. The present petition stands disposed of.
16. The stay application also stands disposed of accordingly.
(DINESH MEHTA),J
299-Mak/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
