Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Bajrang vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 3 October, 2023
Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur
[2023:RJ-JD:32428]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1746/2022
Hari Ram S/o Shri Nand Ram, Aged About 52 Years, R/o Ward
No. 19, Gram Panchayat Sahawa, Tehsil Taranagar, District Churu
(Raj.).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department
Of Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Secretariat,
Rajasthan Jaipur.
2. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Churu, District
Churu.
3. The Vikash Adhikari, Panchayat Samiti Taranagar, District
Churu.
4. The Gram Panchayat Sahawa, Through Its Sarpanch,
Panchayat Samiti Taranagar, District Churu.
----Respondents
Connected With
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1070/2022
Bajrang S/o Shri Birbal Ram, Aged About 53 Years, R/o Ward No.
5, Ramdev Basti, Rawala Mnadi, Tehsil Gharsana, District Sri
Ganganagar (Raj.).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department
Of Panchayati Raj, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat,
Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Sriganganagar,
District Sriganganagar.
3. The Vikas Adhikari, Panchayat Samiti Anoopgarh, District
Sriganganagar.
4. The Gram Panchayat 8Psd (B), Panchayat Samiti
Anoopgarh, District Sriganganagar.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. J.S. Bhaleria
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manish Tak
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
Order
03/10/2023
1. Mr. Bhaleria, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that
the issue involved in the present writ petitions has been set at rest
[2023:RJ-JD:32428] (2 of 3) [CW-1746/2022]
and decided in petitioners' favour by a judgment of the co-
ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Lala Ram Saini vs.
The Stateof Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition
No.11509/2011).
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners argued that the petitioners
are entitled for all benefits as has been given in the case of Lala
Ram Saini (supra).
3. Mr. Tak, learned counsel for the respondent - State, on the
other hand submitted that considering the Lala Ram Saini's case
(supra), another co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated
30.09.2022 passed in the case of Kanhiya Lal vs. State of
Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6469/2020)
has restricted the monetary benefits by observing that the
petitioner shall not be entitled to claim any arrears of pay as a
consequence of pay-fixation in the pay-scale applicable for Class
IV employees. He prayed that the similar order as has been
passed in the case of Kanhiya Lal (supra) be passed in the present
writ petition.
4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and
considering that in the subsequent decision in the case of
KanhiyaLal (supra), co-ordinate Bench of this Court has restricted
petitioners' benefits, after noticing the judgment in the case of
Lala Ram Saini (supra), this Court deems it appropriate to restrict
the petitioners' relief as has been done in the case of Kanhiya Lal
(supra).
5. The writ petitions are, therefore, disposed of while declaring the
petitioners entitled for regularization in services from the date of
initial appointment as Class-IV employee.
[2023:RJ-JD:32428] (3 of 3) [CW-1746/2022]
6. The respondents shall release the petitioner's pension and other
retiral dues while fixing the petitioner's salary as per adjudication
made in the case of Lala Ram Saini (supra). The petitioners,
however, shall not be entitled to claim any arrears of pay as a
consequence of pay-fixation in the pay-scale applicable for Class-
IV employees.
7. All interlocutory applications so also stay application stand
disposed of accordingly.
8. The order has been passed based on the submissions made in
the petitions, the respondents would be free to examine the
veracity of the submissions made in the petitions and only in case,
the averments made therein are found to be correct, the
petitioners would be entitled to the relief.
(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J
275-276-Shahenshah/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
