Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Majid Khan vs Managing Director (2024:Rj-Jd:40021) on 25 September, 2024
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2024:RJ-JD:40021]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16196/2024
1. Majid Khan S/o Mumtaj Khan, Aged About 67 Years, R/o
Sadion Ka Mohalla, Deedwana, District Nagaur.
2. Nav Ratan Mishra S/o Banshi Lal, Aged About 77 Years,
R/o 181, Adarsh Nagar, Wardn O. 09, Nawacity, District
Nagaur.
3. Nijam Khan S/o Mohd. Hussain Khan, Aged About 71
Years, R/o Gurha Salt, District Nagaur.
4. Kamal Khan S/o Chhotu Khan, Aged About 76 Years, R/o
Purani Railway Station, Navacity, Nagaur.
5. Udai Singh Choudhary S/o Ugra Ram, Aged About 70
Years, R/o Senwar Krishi Farm, Kumpras, Post Kumpras,
Via Merta Road, District Nagaur.
6. Dalu Ram Kumawat S/o Shri Balu Ram Kumawat, Aged
About 64 Years, R/o Village And Post Pareek Colony,
Station Road, Kuchaman City, Tehsil Kuchaman City,
District Nagaur.
7. Nola Ram Kumawat S/o Bheru Ram Kumawat, Aged
About 64 Years, R/o Village And Post Khariya Raod, Bhato
Ka Bas, Kuchaman City, Tehsil Kuchaman City, District
Nagaur.
8. Kistoor Mal S/o Chhotu Ram Mali, Aged About 73 Years,
R/o Veer Pratap Mohalla, Nava City, District Nagaur.
9. Moti Lal S/o Mohan Lal, Aged About 66 Years, R/o
Prajapat Bhawan Road, Aadka Bas, Deedwana, District
Nagaur.
10. Richh Pal Singh S/o Bhopal Singh, Aged About 66 Years,
R/o Ganesh Ji Ka Mandir, Deedwana, District Nagaur.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. Managing Director, Ajmer Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Limited,
Vidhyut Bhawan, Ajmer.
2. Deputy Secretary (Pension), Avvnl, Ajmer.
3. Superintending Engineer (O And M), Avvnl, Nagaur.
4. Superintending Engineer (O And M), Sikar.
----Respondents
(Downloaded on 26/09/2024 at 09:05:14 PM)
[2024:RJ-JD:40021] (2 of 3) [CW-16196/2024]
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rahul Sharma
Mr. Sagar Jangid
For Respondent(s) : -
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
25/09/2024
1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the petitioner
has superannuated on 30th June and 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
on 1st 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
[2024:RJ-JD:40021] (3 of 3) [CW-16196/2024]
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, pray 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
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; and if the case of the petitioners fall
within the purview of the law laid down by this Court in the
case of Vijay Singh (supra); the same shall be decided in
terms of the judgment above.
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 sought.
5. Stay application also stands disposed of, accordingly.
(FARJAND ALI),J
293-chhavi/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
