Monday, 18, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Rambharosi Jatav vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:36693)
2024 Latest Caselaw 7661 Raj

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 7661 Raj
Judgement Date : 3 September, 2024

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Rambharosi Jatav vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:36693) on 3 September, 2024

Author: Vinit Kumar Mathur

Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur

[2024:RJ-JD:36693]

        HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                      AT JODHPUR.
                  S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14506/2024

1.       Rambharosi Jatav S/o Ghamandi Lal Verma, Aged About

         65 Years, R/o Gokul Dhabai Ke Pass, Mahu Kalan, Tehsil

         Gangapur       City,        Mahu      Khurd    (Rural),      District    Sawai

         Madhopur, Rajasthan.
2.       Jodharam Pooniya S/o Late Deva Ram, Aged About 81

         Years,      Vpo      Chau,      Tehsil      Nagaur,        District     Nagaur,

         Rajasthan.
3.       Ami Lal Bugaliya S/o Birbal Singh, Aged About 68 Years,

         Resident     Of      Ward      No.     3,   Todi,     District    Jhunjhunu,

         Rajasthan.
                                                                        ----Petitioners
                                         Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, School
         Education Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat,
         Jaipur.
2.       The Director, Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.
3.       The Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.
4.       The    State      Of       Rajasthan,       Through        Additional     Chief
         Secretary,        Finance       Department,            Govt.     Secretariat,
         Rajasthan, Jaipur.
5.       The      Director,         Treasury    And      Accounts         Department,
         Rajasthan, Jaipur.
6.       The Director, Department Of Pension And Pensioners
         Welfare, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
                                                                     ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)               :     Mr. Hansraj Nimbar.
                                      Mr. Amir Khan through VC.



         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Order

[2024:RJ-JD:36693] (2 of 3) [CW-14506/2024]

03/09/2024

1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the

controversy involved in the present case is squarely covered by a

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 case of 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

authorities of the department are directed to decide the same

[2024:RJ-JD:36693] (3 of 3) [CW-14506/2024]

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.

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J 95-AnilSingh/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter