Phoola Ram vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 7029 Raj

[2023:RJ-JD:28768]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

AT JODHPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 410/2022

Phoola Ram S/o Shri Hunta Ram, aged about 55 years, R/o Ward No. 27, Loonkaransar, District-Bikaner (Raj.).

----Petitioner Versus

1. The State of Rajasthan through the Secretary Department of Rural Development and Panchayati Raj Secretariat Rajasthan Jaipur.

2. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Bikaner District-

Bikaner.

3. The Vikash Adhikari, Panchayat Samiti Loonkaransar, District-Bikaner.

----Respondents Connected With S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 260/2022 Tulchha Ram S/o Shri Ishar Ram, aged about 58 years, R/o Ward No. 29, G.P. Loonkaransar, Village Kalawas, District Bikaner (Raj.).

----Petitioner Versus

1. The State of Rajasthan, through the Secretary, Department of Rural Development and Panchayati Raj, Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

2. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Bikaner, District Bikaner.

3. The Vikash Adhikari, Panchayat Samiti Loonkaransar, District Bikaner.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. J.S. Bhaleria. For Respondent(s) : Mr. J.K. Chanda.

[2023:RJ-JD:28768] (2 of 3) [CW-410/2022 & 260/2022]

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI

Order

11/09/2023

1. Counsel for the parties submit that the issue as raised in the

present writ petitions is squarely by order in Vasudev Sharma vs.

State of Rajasthan & Ors. : S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.12286/2018

decided on 29.05.2023 and, therefore, the present writ petitions

be also decided in the light of and with similar directions as given

in the case of Vasudev Sharma (supra).

2. In Vasudev Sharma (supra), a Coordinate Bench after

referring to the orders in the case of Lala Ram Saini vs. The State

of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11509/2011) and

Kanhiya Lal vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition

No.6469/2020 decided on 30.09.2022) came to the following

conclusion:

"4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering that in the subsequent decision in the case of Kanhiya Lal (supra) co-ordinate Bench of this Court has restricted petitioner's benefits, after noticing the judgment in the case of Lala Ram Saini (supra), this Court deems it appropriate to restrict the petitioner's relief as has been done in the case of Kanhiya Lal (supra).

5. The writ petition is, therefore, disposed of while declaring the petitioner entitled for regularization in services from the date of initial appointment as Class-IV employee.

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 petitioner, 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."

[2023:RJ-JD:28768] (3 of 3) [CW-410/2022 & 260/2022]

3. In view of submissions made, the writ petitions are disposed

of in the light of and with similar directions as given in the case of

Vasudev Sharma (supra).

(ARUN BHANSALI),J 223 & 224-DJ/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)