Karan Singh vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 8034 Raj

[2023:RJ-JD:33235]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12748/2023

1. Karan Singh S/o Khet Singh, Aged About 66 Years, Kalaliya Tehsil Raipur, Distt. Pali.

2. Laxman Lal S/o Narayan Lal, Aged About 67 Years, Amarpura, Via Sendara, Tehsil Raipur, Distt. Pali.

3. Bhagwan Singh S/o Bhadu Singh, Aged About 58 Years, Kot, Kot Kirana Tehsil Raipur, Distt. Pali.

4. Kachara Ram Prajapati S/o Bhagu Ram, Aged About 60 Years, Garh Ka Chow, Babra, Distt. Pali.

5. Ugamraj Suthar S/o Rawat Ram, Aged About 64 Years, Pokarna Ki Pol, Jaitaran, Kalaliya, Tehsil Raipur, Distt. Pali.

6. Dalpat Singh S/o Gopal Singh, Aged About 60 Years, 388, Biranthiya Khurd Distt. Pali.

7. Mohan Lal Kumawat S/o Bodu Ram, Aged About 37 Years, Patel Nagar, Satya Chauk, Nimaj, Tehsil Jaitaran, Distt. Pali.

8. Banshi Nath S/o Mangi Nath, Aged About 59 Years, Natho Ka Vas, Nimbera Kalla Distt. Pali.

9. Fajlu Deen S/o Abdul Gafur, Aged About 61 Years, Near Sbi, Jodhpur Rod, Bar, Distt. Pali.

10. Paras Mal Gharu S/o Champa Lal, Aged About 61 Years, Harijano Ka Vas, Biranthiya Khurd, Distt. Pali.

11. Champa Lal S/o Naina Ram, Aged About 59 Years, Megarda, Distt. Pali.

12. Man Singh Choudhary S/o Pabu Ram, Aged About 60 Years, Basiya, Vias Pipaliya Kala, Tehsil Raipur, Distt. Pali.

13. Deepak Singh Chouhan S/o Devi Singh, Aged About 58 Years, Village And Post Kanuja, Via Sendara, Tehsil Raipur, Distt. Pali.

14. Champa Lal Nayak S/o Haraji, Aged About 64 Years, Naya Basti, Biranthiya Kala Distt. Pali.

15. Madan Lal Palariya S/o Bachna Ram, Aged About 59 Years, Palariya Ka Bera, Jodhpur Road, Biranthiya Kala Distt. Pali.

16. Trilok Singh S/o Ratan Singh, Aged About 60 Years, Kota Kirana, Kirana Distt. Pali.

[2023:RJ-JD:33235] (2 of 7) [CW-12748/2023]

17. Mohan Singh Chouhan S/o Nathu Singh, Aged About 58 Years, Kot Khoriya, Bagdinagar, Distt. Pali.

18. Chain Singh Chouhan S/o Nathu Singh, Aged About 62 Years, Banna Ki Nadi, Kalab Kalan, Distt. Pali.

19. Champa Lal Dagdi S/o Prabhu Ram, Aged About 57 Years, Megarda Road Bar, Bar, Kirana Distt. Pali.

20. Veeram Ram S/o Bheeka Ram, Aged About 59 Years, Village Koat Solankiyan, Tehsil Desuri Distt. Pali.

21. Dharmi Chand Verma S/o Dhanna Ram, Aged About 60 Years, Hamado Ka Bas, Hajias, Tehsil Raipur Distt. Pali.

22. Lachhi Ram S/o Dala Ram, Aged About 58 Years, Village And Post Bhandar Road Basti, New Bus Stand Bhandar, Tehsil Bali, District Pali.

23. Ganga Singh S/o Laxman Singh, Aged About 55 Years, Village Barevda, Tehsil Sheoganj, Distt. Sirohi, At Present Posted At Adarsh Govt. Sr. Sec. School Andore, Sirohi.

24. Pala Ram S/o Laxman Ram, Aged About 51 Years, Village Uthman, Tehsil Sheoganj, Distt. Sirohi, At Present Posted At Adarsh Govt. Sr. Sec. School Palri-M, Sirohi.

25. Kheem Singh S/o Hari Singh, Aged About 53 Years, Village Palari-M, Tehsil Sheoganj, Distt. Sirohi, At Present Posted At Adarsh Govt. Sr. Sec. School Andore, Sirohi.

26. Madan Singh S/o Megh Singh, Aged About 55 Years, Village Taleta, Tehsil Sheoganj, Distt. Sirohi, At Present Posted At Adarsh Govt. Sr. Sec. School Kaishnagar, Sirohi.

27. Padam Singh S/o Bhoor Singh, Aged About 52 Years, Village Akhapura, Tehsil Sheoganj, Distt. Sirohi, At Present Posted At Adarsh Govt. Sr. Sec. School Naradara, Sirohi.

28. Pushpendra Singh S/o Shaitan Singh, Aged About 51 Years, Village Palari-M, Tehsil Sheoganj, Distt. Sirohi, At Present Posted At Adarsh Govt. Sr. Sec. School Oda, Sirohi.

29. Mohabbat Singh S/o Devi Singh, Aged About 56 Years, Village Jogarpur, Tehsil Sheoganj, Distt. Sirohi, At Present Posted At Adarsh Govt. Sr. Sec. School Alpa, Sirohi.

30. Derawar Singh S/o Nathu Singh, Aged About 53 Years, Village Naradara, Tehsil Sheoganj, Distt. Sirohi, At Present

[2023:RJ-JD:33235] (3 of 7) [CW-12748/2023]

Posted At Adarsh Govt. Sr. Sec. School Naradara, Sirohi.

31. Bhanwar Singh S/o Ajeet Singh, Aged About 52 Years, Village Posaliya, Tehsil Sheoganj, Distt. Sirohi, At Present Posted At Adarsh Govt. Sr. Sec. School Alpa, Sirohi.

32. Narayan Lal S/o Moti Lal, Aged About 52 Years, Sheoganj, Tehsil Sheoganj, Distt. Sirohi, At Present Posted At Adarsh Govt. Sr. Sec. School Arathwada, Sirohi.

33. Habib Tak S/o Suleman Tak, Aged About 53 Years, Sheoganj, Tehsil Sheoganj, Distt. Sirohi, At Present Posted At Adarsh Govt. Sr. Sec. School Van, Sirohi.

34. Pabu Singh S/o Ranjeet Singh, Aged About 58 Years, Village Mandani, Tehsil Sheoganj, Distt. Sirohi, At Present Posted At Adarsh Govt. Sr. Sec. School Naradara, Sirohi.

35. Himmat Singh Rathore S/o Ram Singh, Aged About 60 Years, Village Siwas Via Khiwara Tehsil Rani, Distt. Pali.

36. Vachan Singh Chouhan S/o Hameer Singh, Aged About 64 Years, Village Underthal Via Sinderli Tehsil Desuri, Distt. Pali.

37. Bhanar Lal S/o Raja Ram, Aged About 61 Years, Village Varkana Tehsil Rani, Distt. Pali.

38. Arjun Singh S/o Jai Singh, Aged About 61 Years, Village Guda Jetsingh Via Somesar Tehsil Rani, Distt. Pali.

39. Jabar Singh Mahecha S/o Pratap Singh, Aged About 65 Years, Village Mandal Tehsil Rani, Distt. Pali.

40. Moti Singh Purohit S/o Bhopal Singh, Aged About 61 Years, Village Punadiya Tehsil Rani, Distt. Pali.

41. Moola Ram Choudhary S/o Bheeka Ram, Aged About 62 Years, Rani Station Tehsil Rani, Distt. Pali.

42. Sona Ram S/o Pukha Ram, Aged About 65 Years, Village Khaud Tehsil Rani, Distt. Pali.

43. Moolvan Goswami S/o Bhabutvan, Aged About 64 Years, Village Jawali, Tehsil Rani, Distt. Pali.

44. Kundan Singh Rathore S/o Devi Singh, Aged About 37 Years, Village Inderwada Tehsil Rani, Distt. Pali.

45. Uda Ram S/o Gala Ram, Aged About 62 Years, Village Chanod, Tehsil Sumerpur, Distt. Pali.

46. Nathu Ram S/o Bhoora Ram, Aged About 58 Years, Village Sanchodi Tehsil Rani, Distt. Pali.

[2023:RJ-JD:33235] (4 of 7) [CW-12748/2023]

47. Chela Ram S/o Rama Ram, Aged About 58 Years, Rani Station Tehsil Rani, Distt. Pali.

48. Khemraj S/o Mishri Lal, Aged About 63 Years, Village Khaud Tehsil Rani, Distt. Pali.

49. Seni Dan Charan S/o Badri Dan, Aged About 63 Years, Village Tokarla Via Khimara Distt. Pali.

50. Jagdish Kumar Parmar S/o Faujmal, Aged About 59 Years, Rani Station Tehsil Rani, Distt. Pali.

51. Ramesh Lal Parmar S/o Faujmal, Aged About 56 Years, Village Balawana Via Jawaibandh Station Tehsil Sumerpur, Distt. Pali.

52. Bihari Singh S/o Shivkaran, Aged About 62 Years, Raipuria Via Khinwara Tehsil Rani, Distt. Pali.

53. Ganpat Singh S/o Achal Singh, Aged About 61 Years, Raipuria Via Khinwara Tehsil Rani, Distt. Pali.

54. Lachha Ram S/o Natha Ram, Aged About 63 Years, Varkana Tehsil Rani, Distt. Pali.

55. Mahipal Singh S/o Prabhu Singh, Aged About 59 Years, Khimel Tehsil Rani, Distt. Pali.

----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner.

3. Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner.

4. District Education Officer (Secondary Edu.), Pali.

5. District Education Officer (Elementary Edu.), Pali.

6. District Education Officer (Secondary Edu.), Sirohi.

7. The Dy. Director, Pension And Pensioners Welfare Department, Jodhpur.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. K.P. Raj Singh. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vishal Jangid, AGC

[2023:RJ-JD:33235] (5 of 7) [CW-12748/2023]

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Order

06/10/2023

Learned counsel for the parties are in agreement that the

controversy involved in the present case is squarely covered by a

judgment of this Court rendered in S.B. Civil Writ Petition

No.14444/2015 (Smt. Saroj Bala Bhatt & Anr. Vs. State of

Rajasthan & Ors.) and other connected matter, decided on

04.08.2022, which reads as under:-

"The present writ petitions have been filed against the order dated 31.10.2015 whereby the earlier order vide which the monetary benefits in pursuance to the selection grade were granted to the petitioners has been ordered to be cancelled. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the issues as to from which date the benefit of selection grade and regularisation has to be granted and whether the benefit already granted can be withdrawn, were under consideration in the matter of State of Rajasthan & Ors. Vs. Chandra Ram (D.B. Special Appeal Writ No.589/2015) decided on 07.07.2017.

While replying to the said issues, the Division Bench held as under:

"37. QUESTION A For the reasons and discussions aforesaid and in view of the law declared by the Supreme Court in the case of Jagdish Narain Chaturvedi and Surendra Mahnot & Ors. (supra); we are of the opinion that the respondent - employee would stand regularized from the date of regularization in service and not prior to that.

38. QUESTION B Taking into consideration the recent decision, prior to two decades the regularization period was not questioned by anybody, therefore, in a writ petition filed by the petitioner it will not be appropriate for us to allow the Government to end the regularization. However,

[2023:RJ-JD:33235] (6 of 7) [CW-12748/2023]

regularization will be from the date of regularization done by the department and not prior thereto.

39. QUESTION C The contention of the counsel for the employees is required to be accepted and it cannot be annulled unless it has been annulled by appropriate authority. However, the benefits shall not be withdrawn but in future when the benefits are to be accorded for further promotion, the same will be considered on the basis of new law declared by the Supreme Court i.e. period will be considered from the date of regularization. When the future benefit of 9, 18 and/or 27 will be considered their ad-hoc service will not be considered for the purpose of benefit of 9, 18 and/or 27 years. But if benefit has already been granted for all the three scales; the same shall not be withdrawn and no recovery will be made from the employees.

40. QUESTION D In view of our answer in above matters, it is very clear that for the purpose of regularisation the date of regularisation will be from the date of regular appointment. In that view of the matter, there cannot be two dates for the purpose of seniority and the other benefits. However, earlier services will be considered for the purpose of the same if there is a shortage in pensionary benefits.

41. QUESTION E In view of the observations made by the Supreme Court, as referred to above, the ad-hocism will not be considered for seniority. In that view of the matter, there will be only one date for regularization, date of regularizing ad-hoc period will not have any effect on seniority. In our considered opinion, the Division Bench of this Court in the case of State of Rajasthan & Ors. vs. Gopa Ram in DB Civil Special Appeal No.44/2016, decided on 18.04.2016 had no right to distinguish the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Jagdish Narayan Chaturvedi (Supra) and State of Rajasthan vs. Surendra Mohnot & Ors.(supra). Thus, the decision of State of Rajasthan & Ors. vs. Gopa Ram (supra) did not lay down correct law. The correct law would be the

[2023:RJ-JD:33235] (7 of 7) [CW-12748/2023]

law declared by the Supreme Court in the two judgments referred hereinabove."

Learned counsel for the respondents also admitted the issue in question to be covered by Chandra Ram's case (supra).

In view of the ratio as laid down in Chandra Ram's case (supra), the present writ petitions are allowed on the same terms and conditions.

All the pending applications also stand disposed of."

For the self same reasons, the present writ petitions are

disposed of in light of the judgment rendered by this Court in the

case of Smt. Saroj Bala Bhatt (supra).

It is made clear that any recovery made by the respondents

in pursuance of the grant of ACP, the petitioners will be free to

move an appropriate representations in accordance with law for

the refund of the recovery.

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J 77-AnilSingh/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)