Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Omprakash Meena vs State Of Rajasthan (2023:Rj-Jd:39909) on 21 November, 2023
Author: Kuldeep Mathur
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
[2023:RJ-JD:39909]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18188/2023
1. Omprakash Meena S/o Karansingh Meena, Aged About 63
Years, R/o Village And Post Khanpur Meena, Tehsil Bari,
District Dholpur, Rajasthan.
2. Omprakash S/o Faguniram, Aged About 60 Years, R/o
Village Kuiya, Post Atarsuma, Tehsil Basedi, District
Dholpur, Rajasthan.
3. Sudarshan Kumar Sharma S/o Ramswaroop Sharma,
Aged About 68 Years, R/o Village And Post Sikri, 1050,
Vaish Mohhalla, Sikri Patti, Tehsil Sikri, District Bharatpur,
Rajasthan.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Chief Secretary,
Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Finance
Secretary, Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
3. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary To The
Government, Department Of Personnel, Govt. Of
Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
4. The Director, Treasury And Accounts Department,
Rajasthan, Jaipur.
5. The Director, Department Of Pension And Pensioner's
Welfare, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
6. The Director, Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.
7. Joint Director, School Education, Bharatpur Division,
Bharatpur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Hans Raj Nimbar
For Respondent(s) : ---
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
Order
[2023:RJ-JD:39909] (2 of 3) [CW-18188/2023]
21/11/2023
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".
Learned counsel, therefore, prays that the petitioners may
be permitted to file a detailed representation before the
competent authorities for redressal of their grievances.
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
[2023:RJ-JD:39909] (3 of 3) [CW-18188/2023]
representation, keeping in mind the law laid down by this Court in
the case of Vijay Singh (supra).
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.
(KULDEEP MATHUR),J
36-Hanuman/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
