Manoj Prakash Mathur vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 9164 Raj

[2023:RJ-JD:38200]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17677/2023

Manoj Prakash Mathur S/o Late Shri Vivek Prakash Mathur, Aged About 60 Years, R/o D-86, Shastri Nagar, Jodhpur (Raj.)

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Public Health Engineering Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Finance, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

3. The Director, Directorate Of Pension And Pensioner's Welfare, Rajasthan, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur.

4. Joint Director, Department Of Pension And Pensioner's Welfare, Rajasthan, Jodhpur.

5. The District Collector, Jodhpur

6. The Chief Engineer, Phed, Department, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jay Prakash.

For Respondent(s)              :     --



            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

                                          Order

06/11/2023

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:-

[2023:RJ-JD:38200] (2 of 3) [CW-17677/2023]

"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 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 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

[2023:RJ-JD:38200] (3 of 3) [CW-17677/2023]

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

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

(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 29-Prashant/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)