Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Ashok Kumar Sharma vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 12 May, 2023
Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur
[2023/RJJD/014929]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6546/2023
Ashok Kumar Sharma S/o Ramji Lal Sharma, Aged About 62
Years, R/o Mahalaxmi Apartment, Near Gumanpura Thana,
Chhawani, Kota, District Kota, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Chief Secretary, Government
Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary
Department Of Personnel And Training Government
Secretariat, Jaipur.
3. The Secretary (Finance), Finance Department, State Of
Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.
4. The Deputy Secretary, Department Of Administrative
Reforms (Group-3), Secretariat, Jaipur.
5. The Commissioner, Transport Department, Govt. Of
Rajasthan, Jaipur.
6. The Regional Transport Officer, Transport Department,
Kota, Rajasthan.
7. The Regional Transport Officer, Transport Department,
Dausa, Rajasthan.
8. The District Transport Officer, Sawaimadhopur, Rajasthan.
9. The District Transport Officer, Bundi, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Hansraj Nimbar
Mr. R.P. Saini
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Hemant Choudhary, G.C.
Mr. Vishal Jangid, Dy.G.C.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
Order
12/05/2023
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in similar
circumstances and similar matters, the Division Bench of this
Court in The Director, Secondary Education, Rajasthan,
Bikaner Vs. Narendra Kumar Boolchandani & Ors.; D.B.
Special Appeal Writ No.362/2020 along with connected
[2023/RJJD/014929] (2 of 3) [CW-6546/2023]
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 petitioner submits that the present writ
petition of the petitioner may also be disposed of in light of the
abovementioned judgment.
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).
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,
[2023/RJJD/014929] (3 of 3) [CW-6546/2023]
the averments made therein are found to be correct, the
petitioners would be entitled to the relief.
(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J
105-/Vivek/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
