Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Mustak Ahamad Hanafi vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 27 September, 2024
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2024:RJ-JD:40339]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16028/2024
1. Mustak Ahamad Hanafi S/o Peer Mohammad Hanafi, Aged
About 67 Years, R/o H. No. 4, Aakash Kunj, Baran Road,
Near Mahalaxmi Puram, Borkhandi, Kota, Rajasthan.
2. Abdul Muttalib Hanfi S/o Abdul Gafur, Aged About 67
Years, R/o Nath Ka Mohalla, Near Jama Masjid, Ward No.
14, Sheopur, Madhya Pradesh.
3. Jagdish Prasad Sharma S/o Govind Lal Sharma, Aged
About 71 Years, R/o Ravindra Colony, Nainwa, Bundi,
Rajasthan.
4. Ramkaran Gothwal S/o Prem Chand Gothawal, Aged
About 62 Years, R/o Mahadev Meharda, 53, Kamla Nagar,
Behind Choradiya Patrol Pump, Sanganer, Jaipur,
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, Sanskrit Education, Shiksha Sankul, J.l.n.
Marg, Jaipur (Rajasthan).
4. The Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
5. The Director, Prosecution, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.
6. The Deputy Director, Prosecution, Kota Division, Kota.
7. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Additional Chief
Secretary, Department Of Finance, Secretariat,
Rajasthan, Jaipur.
8. The Director, Treasury And Accounts Department,
Rajasthan, Jaipur
9. The Director, Department Of Pension And Pensioner's
Welfare, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Hans Raj Nimbar
Mr. Ram Pratap Saini
For Respondent(s) : --
(Downloaded on 30/09/2024 at 09:09:41 PM)
[2024:RJ-JD:40339] (2 of 3) [CW-16028/2024]
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
27/09/2024
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits 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 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.
[2024:RJ-JD:40339] (3 of 3) [CW-16028/2024]
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 petitioner 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 petitioner 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 petitioner falls
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 petitioner would be entitled to the relief sought.
5. Stay application also stands disposed of, accordingly.
(FARJAND ALI),J
33-Ashutosh/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
