Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Mahaveer Prasad Sharma vs State Of Rajasthan (2023:Rj-Jd:40348) on 23 November, 2023
Author: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
[2023:RJ-JD:40348]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18423/2023
1. Mahaveer Prasad Sharma S/o Shri Bhagwan Sharma,
Aged About 61 Years, R/o Ward No. 18, Shastri Nagar,
Losal, Tehsil Danta Ramgarh, District Sikar, Rajasthan.
2. Babu Lal Raigar S/o Shri Phool Chand Raigar, Aged About
60 Years, R/o Ward No.14, Surya Colony, Ranoli, District
Sikar, Rajasthan.
3. Narayan Lal Raigar S/o Shri Gopi Ram Raigar, Aged About
68 Years, R/o Surya Colony, Raigar Mohalla, Ranoli,
District Sikar, Rajasthan.
4. Amar Singh Yadav S/o Shri Netram Yadav, Aged About 63
Years, R/o Bhamoowas, Bhonker, Alwar, Rajasthan.
5. Om Prakash Sharma S/o Shri Chhakori Lal Sharma, Aged
About 62 Years, R/o Saipau Road, Ramkung Colony,
Dhaulpur, Rajasthan.
6. Jasroop Mal Lodha S/o Shri Moti Lal Lodha, Aged About
71 Years, R/o Plot No.7 B, Gali No.2, Ram Nagar, New
Bhadwasiya Road, Jodhpur, Rajasthan.
7. Om Narain Purohit S/o Shri Satya Narayan Purohit, Aged
About 67 Years, R/o Mam Khejdi Ki Gali, City Police,
Jodhpur, Rajasthan.
8. Virendra Choudhary S/o Shri Hanuman Singh Choudhary,
Aged About 68 Years, R/o 115, Ratanada, Subash Chowk,
Jodhpur, Rajasthan.
9. Dhagla Ram Choudhary S/o Shri Chhoga Ram, Aged
About 69 Years, R/o Arvind Nagar, B-43, Jodhpur,
Rajasthan.
10. Uka Ram Vaishnav S/o Shri Mohan Das, Aged About 63
Years, R/o Mohalla Kayasth Wada, Tijara, Alwar,
Rajasthan.
11. Madhu Ram Khaliya S/o Shri Harsukh Ram, Aged About
67 Years, R/o Bhagwanpura Nala, Riyan Bari, Merta,
District Nagaur, Rajasthan.
12. Pooram Chand Sharma S/o Shri Prabhati Lal, Aged About
64 Years, R/o 648/41, Gali No.4, Bihari Ganj, Ajmer,
Rajasthan.
13. Bishamber Dayal Yadav S/o Shri Tara Chand Yadav, Aged
(Downloaded on 24/11/2023 at 08:44:19 PM)
[2023:RJ-JD:40348] (2 of 4) [CW-18423/2023]
About 74 Years, R/o Ward No.12, Adarsh Colony, Siwana
Road, Khairthal, Alwar, Rajasthan.
14. Ramesh Chand Sharma S/o Shri Panna Lal Sharma, Aged
About 76 Years, R/o Khati Wada, Ward No.1, Khairthal,
Alwar, Rajasthan.
15. Jagdish Prasad Sharma S/o Shri Gyarsi Lal Sharma, Aged
About 63 Years, R/o Village Malutana, Tehsil Thanagazi,
Alwar, Rajasthan.
16. Hari Ram Choudhary S/o Shri Hansa Ram, Aged About 62
Years, R/o Gusaiyon Ka Bas, Sirasana, Tehsil Degana,
District Nagaur, Rajasthan.
17. Surendra Singh S/o Shri Mangla Ram, Aged About 61
Years, R/o Dhulaji Ka Bas, Sirasana, Tehsil Degana,
District Nagaur, Rajasthan.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,
Department Of Education, Govt. Of Rajasthan,
Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. The Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner, Rajasthan.
3. The Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner, Rajasthan.
4. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of
Medical And Health, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat,
Jaipur, Rajasthan.
5. The Director (Administration), Department Of Medical And
Health, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur,
Rajasthan.
6. The Director, Directorate Of Pension Department,
Government Of Rajasthan, Jyoti Nagar, Lalkothi, Jaipur,
Rajasthan.
7. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of
Personnel And Training, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat,
Jaipur, Rajasthan.
8. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of
Finance, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur,
Rajasthan.
9. The Secretary, Rajasthan Public Service Commission,
Ajmer, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Rajasthan.
(Downloaded on 24/11/2023 at 08:44:19 PM)
[2023:RJ-JD:40348] (3 of 4) [CW-18423/2023]
10. The Director General Of Police, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur,
Rajasthan.
11. The Managing Director, Jodhpur Vidhyut Vitran Nigam
Limited, Jodhpur, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Surendra Singh Choudhary
For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
23/11/2023
1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
controversy involved in the present case is squarely covered by a
judgment dated 21.07.2023 of this Court at Jaipur Bench rendered
in batch of writ petition led by S.B. Civil Writ Petition
No.21/2020 (Vijay Singh vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.). The
operative part of the said order reproduced as under :-
"41. Hence, looking to the binding effect of above
judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of C.P.
Mundinamani(supra) and All India Judges
Association (supra), it is held that the petitioners would
be entitled to get the benefits of increment falling due on
1st July on account of their conduct for the requisite length
of time i.e. one year. The petitioners would be entitled to
get notional payment on 1st July, notwithstanding their
superannuation on 30th June.
42. The respondents are directed to consider the case of
the petitioners afresh in the light of the observations
made hereinabove and thereafter grant notional
increment to the petitioners. The petitioners' pension
would consequently be refixed. The appropriate orders be
issued and the arrears of pension be paid to the
petitioners within a period of three months from the date
of receipt of certified copy of this order.
43. With the aforesaid directions, all these petitions
stand disposed of.
44. Stay applications and all applications (pending, if
any) also stand disposed of".
[2023:RJ-JD:40348] (4 of 4) [CW-18423/2023]
2. Learned counsel, therefore, prays that the petitioners may
be permitted to file a detailed representation before the
competent authorities for redressal of their grievances.
3. In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed
with liberty to the petitioners to file a representation to the
competent authorities of the department and the competent
authorities of the department are directed to decide the same
within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of such
representation, keeping in mind the law laid down by this Court in
the case of Vijay Singh (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,
the averments made therein are found to be correct, the
petitioners would be entitled to the relief.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.
9-Sudheer/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
