Rajesh Kumar Vyas vs The State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 10151 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Rajesh Kumar Vyas vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 28 November, 2023

Author: Kuldeep Mathur

Bench: Kuldeep Mathur

[2023:RJ-JD:40995]

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                        JODHPUR
                 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18420/2023

Rajesh Kumar Vyas S/o Chothmal, Aged About 61 Years, R/o
Shivvari, Nagaur, District Nagaur.
                                                                          ----Petitioner
                                         Versus
1.       The State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department
         Of Finance, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2.       The      Director,         Pension        And        Pensioners        Welfare
         Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
3.       The     Joint   Director,       Pension       And      Pensioners      Welfare
         Department, Ajmer.
4.       The District Education Officer, Nagaur.
                                                                       ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)              :    Mr. A.D. Ujjwal.
For Respondent(s)              :    --



            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

Order

28/11/2023

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

controversy involved in the present case is squarely covered by a

judgment rendered in a bunch of writ petitions led by S.B. Civil

Writ Petition No.21/2020 "Vijay Singh Vs. State of

Rajasthan & Ors. and other connected matters decided on

21.07.2023 in the following terms:-

"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

[2023:RJ-JD:40995] (2 of 3) [CW-18420/2023]

get the benefits of increment falling due on 1st July on account of their conduct for 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 herein above 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 the certified copy of this order.

43. With the aforesaid directions, all these petitions stand dispose of.

44. Stay applications and all applications(pending, if any) also stand disposed of.

45. The parties are left free to bear their own costs."

Learned counsel further submits that the controversy has

also been set at rest by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of

The Director (Admn. And HR) KPTCL & Ors. Vs. C.P.

Mundinamani & Ors. : Civil Appeal No.2471/2023 affirming

the view taken in the case of Vijay Singh (supra).

In this view of the matter, learned counsel for the petitioner

seeks liberty to approach the respondents by way of filing a

detailed representation for redressal of his grievances.

Considering the judgment of this Court in Vijay Singh

(supra) as well as the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in

C.P. Mundinamani (supra), the respondents are directed to

consider the representation of the petitioner and decide the same

in accordance with the law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme

Court as well as this Court in the cases of C.P. Mundinamani

[2023:RJ-JD:40995] (3 of 3) [CW-18420/2023]

(supra) & Vijay Singh (supra), preferably within a period of eight

weeks from the date of receipt of such representation.

The writ petition stands disposed of.

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 petitioner

would be entitled to the relief.

(KULDEEP MATHUR),J 50-AbhishekK/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)