Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Abdul Vahid vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:12874) on 7 March, 2025
Author: Dinesh Mehta
Bench: Dinesh Mehta
[2025:RJ-JD:12874]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4551/2025
1. Abdul Vahid S/o Shri Mohd Ishaque, Aged About 68 Years,
R/o Ward No. 25, House No. 24, Patrakar Colony Behind
S.t. Depo, District Dungarpur, Rajasthan (Ppo No.
1030139).
2. Mohammed Aslam Khan S/o Shri Mohammed Hayat Khan,
Aged About 68 Years, R/o Ward No. 8, Kalika Mata Mandir
Ke Pas, Madar Colony, District Dungarpur, Rajasthan (Ppo
No. 1030152).
3. Raman Lal Jain S/o Shri Kachru Lal Jain, Aged About 69
Years, R/o B-26, Ashok Nagar, Bus Stand To Hospital
Road, District Dungarpur, Rajasthan (Ppo No. 1002392).
4. Anjna Dave W/o Shri Fajal Hussain, Aged About 62 Years,
R/o House No. 203, Jawahar Colony, Navapadar, Garhi,
District Banswara, Rajasthan (Ppo No. 1169247)
5. Balbhadra Singh Katara S/o Shri Kamlashanker Katara,
Aged About 64 Years, R/o Veja Fala, Gengi, District
Dungarpur, Rajasthan (Ppo No. 1123199).
6. Manohar Singh Ranawat S/o Shri Surya Singh Ranawat,
Aged About 63 Years, R/o Ward No. 2, Sanskrit College
Road Purana Bus Stand, Post Ganoda Ghatol, District
Banswara, Rajasthan (Ppo No. 1146649).
7. Bhupat Singh Rathod S/o Shri Shanker Singh Rathod,
Aged About 66 Years, R/o Ward No. 14, Post
Mohkampura, Kushalgarh, District Banswara, Rajasthan
(Ppo No. 1090198).
8. Hari Singh Chundawat S/o Shri Bhabhut Singh
Chundawat, Aged About 65 Years, R/o B-139, Subhash
Nagar Behind New Hospital Opposite Garden Ke Pass,
District Dungarpur, Rajasthan (Ppo No. 1102860).
9. Ravi Shanker Patidar S/o Shri Shivji Patidar, Aged About
62 Years, R/o Waya Khadgada, Mukam Post Chadoli,
Simalwara, District Dungarpur, Rajasthan (Ppo No.
1171687).
10. Dolat Singh Chundawat S/o Shri Kishor Singh Chundawat,
Aged About 76 Years, R/o Ward No. 13, Mukam Post
Panchkundi, District Dungarpur, Rajasthan (Ppo No.
568915).
[2025:RJ-JD:12874] (2 of 5) [CW-4551/2025]
11. Ashok Kumar Choubisa S/o Shri Ganesh Lal Ji Choubisa,
Aged About 65 Years, R/o Ward No. 10, Mukam Post
Mowai, Bankora, District Dungarpur, Rajasthan (Ppo No.
1100568).
12. Ratan Devi Kandara, Aged About 64 Years, R/o Vadiyo Ka
Dugara, Sagwara, District Dungarpur, Rajasthan (Ppo No.
1151741).
13. Babulal Nagar S/o Shri Jankilal Nagar, Aged About 66
Years, R/o 5/163, Mahi Colony, District Banswara,
Rajasthan (Ppo No. 1057050).
14. Hiralal Katara S/o Shri Manji Katara, Aged About 62
Years, R/o Ward No. 08, Adivasi Mohalla Gamdi, District
Banswara, Rajasthan (Ppo No. 1172545).
15. Shati Lal Ninama S/o Shri Heera Ji Ninama, Aged About
62 Years, R/o 1,2, Pushpa Nagar, Peeplod, District
Banswara, Rajasthan (Ppo No. 1170241).
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary, Local
Bodies, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Principal Secretary, Social Justice And Empowerment
Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
3. The Principal Secretary, Medical And Health Department,
Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
4. The Principal Secretary, Ayush Department, Govt. Of
Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
5. The Additional Chief Secretary, Home Department, Govt.
Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
6. The Principal Secretary, Board Of Revenue Department,
Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
7. The Principal Secretary, Agriculture Department, Govt. Of
Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
8. The Principal Secretary, Pension And Pensioners Welfare
Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
9. The Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department,
Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
10. The Director, Local Bodies, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
[2025:RJ-JD:12874] (3 of 5) [CW-4551/2025]
11. The Director, Social Justice And Empowerment
Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
12. The Director, Medical And Health Department,
Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
13. The Director, Ayush Department, Government Of
Rajasthan, Ajmer.
14. The Director General Of Police Department, Government
Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
15. The Director, Agriculture Department, Government Of
Rajasthan, Jaipur.
16. The Director, Prosecution Department, Government Of
Rajasthan, Jaipur.
17. The Director, Pension And Pensioners Welfare
Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
18. The District Collector (Land-Revenue), Banswara.
19. The Executive Engineer, Division Mahi Project, Water
Resources Department, Banswara.
20. The Executive Engineer, Bhikha Bhai, Mahi Project, Water
Resources Department, Sagwara.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Muskan Jangid for
Mr. Rishabh Tayal
JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
Order
07/03/2025
1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners have superannuated on 30th June and the controversy
involved in the present case is squarely covered by a judgment
dated 21.07.2023 passed by 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:-
[2025:RJ-JD:12874] (4 of 5) [CW-4551/2025]
"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.
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
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
[2025:RJ-JD:12874] (5 of 5) [CW-4551/2025]
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.
5. The stay application also stands disposed of accordingly.
(DINESH MEHTA),J
8-akansha/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
