Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Laxmi Narayan Sharma vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 4 September, 2024
Author: Vinit Kumar Mathur
Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur
[2024:RJ-JD:36753] (1 of 3) [CW-14544/2024]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14544/2024
1. Laxmi Narayan Sharma S/o Shiv Prasad, Aged About 62
Years, Mali Mohalla, Near Girls School, Makrana, District
Naguar, Rajasthan.
2. Ram Prasad Nagar S/o Ram Chandra Nagar, Aged About
64 Years, Sunder Sadan, Near Murli Manohar Mandir,
Sunel, District Jhalawar, Rajasthan.
3. Smt. Harshi Manchanda W/o Chandra Prakash
Manchanda, Aged About 66 Years, 1-Bha-56, Vigyan
Nagar, Kota, Rajasthan.
4. Ghan Shyam Shringi S/o Mohan Lal Shringi, Aged About
66 Years, 521, Basant Vihar, Sector-9, Kota, Rajasthan.
5. Meena Chouhan W/o Narendra Singh, Aged About 62
Years, 996, Gyan Nagar, Hiran Magri, Udaipur, Rajasthan.
6. Hemlata Sharma W/o Tribhuvan Paneri, Aged About 62
Years, 27/149, Panerio Ki Madri, Near Patwari, Hiran
Magri, Seactor-6, Udaipur, Rajasthan.
7. Usha Kiran Dendor W/o Ramesh Chandra Dendor, Aged
About 64 Years, 14-15, Laxmi Narayan Nagar, Behind
Savina Vatika, Udaipur, Rajasthan.
8. Dhan Kanwar Vyas D/o Kishan Chand Sharma, Aged
About 68 Years, H.no.89, Gali No.7, Saraswati Colony,
Baran Road, Kota, Rajasthan.
9. Asha Ram Gaur S/o Hamer Lal Gaur, Aged About 75
Years, 36/8, Saraswati Colony, Baran Road, Kota,
Rajasthan.
10. Kamlakar Sharma S/o Kanhaiya Lal Sharma, Aged About
67 Years, Sherpur Khilchipur, District Sawaimadhopur,
Rajasthan.
11. Chhagan Singh Kelwa S/o Ratan Singh Kelwa, Aged About
65 Years, 12-A, Jawahar Colony, Near Mewa Ram Milk
Dairy, Jhalawar, Rajasthan.
12. Smt. Kaushliya Kumari W/o Mahaveer Singh, Aged About
66 Years, Near Nagin Niwas, Rangpur, Kota, Rajasthan.
13. Nathoo Lal Jat S/o Ganga Ram Jat, Aged About 60 Years,
Azad Mohalla, Bhadsora, Chittorgarh, Rajasthan.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,
School Education Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.
3. The Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.
4. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Medical
And Health Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur,
(Downloaded on 04/09/2024 at 09:01:45 PM)
[2024:RJ-JD:36753] (2 of 3) [CW-14544/2024]
Rajasthan.
5. The Director (Non-Gazetted), Medical And Health
Services, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
6. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Additional Chief
Secretary, Department Of Finance, Secretariat,
Rajasthan, Jaipur.
7. The Director, Treasury And Accounts Department,
Rajasthan, Jaipur
8. The Director, Department Of Pension And Pensioners
Welfare, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Hansraj Nimbar
Mr. Ram Pratap Saini Through VC
For Respondent(s) : Mr. I. R. Choudhary AAG
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
Order
04/09/2024
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 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
[2024:RJ-JD:36753] (3 of 3) [CW-14544/2024]
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 his 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
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
88-/vivek/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
