Rajasthan High Court
Dinesh Chandra Mishra, S/O Shri Ram ... vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jp:4098) on 24 January, 2024
Author: Sameer Jain
Bench: Sameer Jain
[2024:RJ-JP:4098]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1078/2024
1. Dinesh Chandra Mishra, S/o Shri Ram Charan Mishra,
Aged About 67 Years, R/o 3, Prem Nagar, Behind Morani
Moters, Tonk Road, Jaipur. Retired On 30.06.2016 From
The Post Of UDC At O/o Krishi Upaj Mandi Samity (Grain)
Surajpole Mandi Jaipur Rajasthan
2. Mahesh Chandra Mishra, S/o Shri Ram Charan Mishra,
Aged About 72 Years, R/o 2A, Prem Nagar, Behind Morani
Moters, Tonk Road, Jaipur Retired On 30.06.2012 From
The Post Of Marketing Officer At O/o Directorate Of
Agriculture Marketing, Pant Krishi Bhawan Jaipur
Rajasthan.
3. Ashok Kumar Nag, S/o Shri Avadh Bihari Nag, Aged About
76 Years, R/o F-13 Ramesh Marg, C- Scheme Jaipur,
Retired On 30.06.2008 From The Post Of Marketing
Officer At O/o Directorate Of Agriculture Marketing, Pant
Krishi Bhawan Jaipur Rajasthan.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary,
Agriculture Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Director, Agriculture Marketing Department, Pant Krishi
Bhawan Jaipur Rajasthan.
3. Director, Pension Department, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur.
4. Secretary, Krishi Upaj Mandi Samity (Grain) Surajpole
Mandi Jaipur Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vijay Pathak
For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.M. Sharma for
Mr. Rajendra Soni, AAG
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN
Order
24/01/2024
(Downloaded on 09/02/2024 at 10:28:14 PM)
[2024:RJ-JP:4098] (2 of 3) [CW-1078/2024]
1. Learned counsel Mr. S.M. Sharma enters appearance on
behalf of learned AAG Rajendra Soni, for the respondents.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue
involved in the present matter is no more res integra in view of
judgment of Division Bench of this Court in the case of Ramesh
Chander Gupta vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (D.B. Civil Writ
Petition No. 2800/2021; decided on 17.10.2023). It is
further submitted that in similar facts and circumstances, the
order of the Division Bench has also been followed by Co-ordinate
Bench in the case of Ramesh Chand vs. State of Rajasthan &
Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19121/2023; decided on
07.12.2023).
3. Learned counsel for the respondents does not dispute the
fact that the issue, as raised in the present writ petition, is similar
to Ramesh Chander Gupta (supra). However, it is contended
that the petitioner has approached the Court at a belated stage.
4. Heard and considered.
5. The fact that the issue involved is covered by Division Bench
of this Court in case of Ramesh Chander Gupta (supra)
remains undisputed. The contention that the petitioner has
approached the Court with a little delay is of no relevancy in the
facts and circumstances as matters of salary and pension have a
recurring cause of action, as was held by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in Rushibhai Jagdishbhai Pathak vs. Bhavnagar
Municipal Corporation: 2022 (4) SLR 862 (SC).
6. In the case of Ramesh Chander Gupta (supra), Division
Bench of this Court inter-alia while referring to orders passed in
[2024:RJ-JP:4098] (3 of 3) [CW-1078/2024]
Union of India & Ors. vs. Manohar Lal & Ors. (D.B. Civil Writ
Petition No.5445/2022; decided on 07.08.2023) & the
Commissioner, Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan & Anr. vs.
Ram Karan Bhakar & Ors. (D.B. Civil Writ Petition
No.4139/2022) as well as judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court
in the case of The Director (Admn. and HR) KPTCL & Ors. vs.
C.P. Mundinamani & Ors.: 2023 SCC Online SC 401 has
passed the following directions:-
"It is also brought to the notice of this Court that
Special Leave Petition (C) No.3420/2023 and Special
Leave Petition (C) No.1001/2023 have also been dis-
posed off on 19.05.2023. A copy of orders dated
11.04.2023 and 19.05.2023 passed by Hon'ble
Supreme Court have also been placed on record.
Therefore, the present petitions are also disposed off
on the same terms with direction to the respondents
to consider the claim of the petitioners and pass ap-
propriate orders and other consequential benefits as
per their entitlement. Whatever amount is found
payable be also released within a period of one month.
Accordingly, the present petitions are dis-posed of."
7. In view of the joint statement of the learned counsel for the
parties, this Court deems it just and proper to dispose of this writ
petition on the same terms and with direction to the respondents
to consider the petitioners' claim and pass appropriate orders in
the light of the Division Bench judgment, as referred to above,
within a period of two months.
(SAMEER JAIN),J
DEEPAK/36
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
