Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Shankar Lal Bamniya vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 1 October, 2024
Author: Vinit Kumar Mathur
Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur
[2024:RJ-JD:40696]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16109/2024
1. Shankar Lal Bamniya S/o Shri Huramal Bamniya, Aged
About 64 Years, R/o Deva Fala, Post Ambada Vaya
Chikhli, District Dungarpur, Rajasthan (Ppo No. 3188)
2. Mohanlal Bhoi S/o Shri Bhagwan Bhoi, Aged About 68
Years, R/o Bhadwada Road, Sagwara, District Dungarpur,
Rajasthan (Ppo No. 213)
3. Chandra Shanker Pandya S/o Shri Umiyashanker Pandya,
Aged About 72 Years, R/o Ward No. 9, Talab Fali, Post
Dhambola, Simalwara District Dungapur, Rajasthan (Ppo
No. 15258)
4. Jitendra Prasad Pandya S/o Shri Purshottam Pandya,
Aged About 67 Years, R/o Ward No. 11, Mandir Vali Fali,
Post Dhambola, Simalwara District Dungarpur, Rajasthan
(Ppo No. 923)
5. Prabhu Dendor S/o Shri Amra Dendor, Aged About 70
Years, R/o Ward No. 4, Village Post Gate Mavita, Tehsil
Sagwara, District Dungarpur, Rajasthan (Ppo No. 25382)
----Petitioners
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary,
Energy Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Govt.
Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Secretary (Administration), Ajmer Vidyut Vitran
Nigam Ltd., Ajmer.
3. The Deputy Secretary (Pension), Rajasthan Rajya Vidhyut
Prasaran Nigam, Jaipur.
4. The Assistant Secretary (Pension), Ajmer Vidyut Vitran
Nigam Ltd., Ajmer.
5. The Regional Chief Engineer (Udaipur Region), Ajmer
Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Udaipur.
6. The Superintending Engineer (O & M), Ajmer Vidyut
Vitran Nigam Ltd., Dungarpur.
7. The Executive Engineer ( O & M), Ajmer Vidyut Vitran
Nigam Ltd., Sagwara.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rishabh Tayal
Mr. Jitendra Choudhary
Ms. Muskan Jangid
Mr. Vivek Sharma
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
Order
01/10/2024
1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
controversy involved in the present case is squarely covered by a
[2024:RJ-JD:40696] (2 of 3) [CW-16109/2024]
judgment dated 21.07.2023 of this Court at Jaipur Bench rendered
in a batch of writ petitions led by S.B. Civil Writ Petition
No.21/2020 (Vijay Singh vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.). The
operative part of the said order is 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 on1st
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 caseof
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"
2. Learned counsel, therefore, prays that the petitioners may
be permitted to file a detailed representation before the
competent authorities for redressal of their grievances.
3. In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed of
with liberty to the petitioners to file a representation to the
competent authorities of the department and the competent
[2024:RJ-JD:40696] (3 of 3) [CW-16109/2024]
authorities of the department are directed to decide the same
within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of such
representation, keeping in mind the law laid down by this Court in
the case of Vijay Singh (supra).
4. 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.
5. Stay application also stands disposed of accordingly.
(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J
16-/Arun P/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
