Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Nepal Raj Chakradhari vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 4 September, 2024
Author: Vinit Kumar Mathur
Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur
[2024:RJ-JD:36752] (1 of 4) [CW-14543/2024]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14543/2024
1. Nepal Raj Chakradhari S/o Ramsahay Chakradhari, Aged
About 64 Years, R/o Vpo Didwana, Tehsil Lalsot, District
Dausa, Rajasthan.
2. Bhinya Ram S/o Chuna Ram, Aged About 63 Years, R/o
Village Titiri, Post Khamiyad, Via Ratau, Tehsil Ladnu,
District Nagaur, Rajasthan.
3. Mohan Lal Sharma S/o Haridwar Mal Sharma, Aged About
68 Years, R/o Plot No. 5, Ganga Vihar Colony, Ajmer
Road, Bagru Rawan, Post Bagru, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
4. Rahul Kumar Talesara S/o Gauttam Lal Talesara, Aged
About 78 Years, R/o 42, Shanti Niketan Colony, Bedla,
Badagaon, Link Road, Udaipur, Rajasthan.
5. Radhey Shyam Saini S/o Mala Ram Saini, Aged About 66
Years, R/o Mandrella Byepass Road, Ward No. 42,
Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan.
6. Moti Lal Banshiwal S/o Mool Chand Banshiwal, Aged
About 65 Years, R/o 1/206, Ganesh Talab, Basant Bihar,
Kota, Rajasthan.
7. Hemant Kumar S/o Devi Ram, Aged About 62 Years, R/o
5/18, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
8. Rajesh Chandra Dwivedi S/o R.s.l. Dwivedi, Aged About
63 Years, R/o 71, Vishwa Karma Nagar-I, Maharani Farm,
Durgapura, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
9. Devi Lal Vairagi S/o Fateh Lal Vairagi, Aged About 64
Years, R/o A-56, Chitragupt Colony, Near Mahaveer
Nagar, Sector-5, Kota, Rajasthan.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,
Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department,
Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Registrar, Board Of Revenue, Ajmer.
3. The Director, Panchayati Raj Department, Rajasthan,
Jaipur.
4. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Nagaur.
(Downloaded on 04/09/2024 at 09:01:43 PM)
[2024:RJ-JD:36752] (2 of 4) [CW-14543/2024]
5. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Dausa.
6. The District Collector, Jhunjhunu.
7. The Director, Department Of Animal Husbandry,
Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
8. The Director, Fisheries Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
9. Rajasthan Cooperative Dairy Federation Limited, Through
Managing Director, Saras Sankul, Jln Marg, Jaipur.
10. The General Manager, (Personnel And Administration),
Rajasthan Cooperative Dairy Federation Limited, Saras
Sankul, Jln Marg, Jaipur.
11. Chief Engineer (Admin), Public Health Engineering
Department, Jal Bhawan-2, Civil Lines, Jaipur.
12. The Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department,
Rajasthan, Jaipur.
13. The Regional Development Commissioner, Commandant
Area Development (Cad), Chambal Kota, Rajasthan.
14. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Additional Secretary,
Department Of Finance, Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
15. The Director, Treasury And Accounts Department,
Rajasthan, Jaipur.
16. 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
[2024:RJ-JD:36752] (3 of 4) [CW-14543/2024]
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 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
[2024:RJ-JD:36752] (4 of 4) [CW-14543/2024]
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
87-/vivek/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
