Dr. Surendra Kumar Sharma vs The State Of Rajasthan ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 8644 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Dr. Surendra Kumar Sharma vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 10 March, 2025

Author: Pushpendra Singh Bhati

Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati

[2025:RJ-JD:13418-DB]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                 D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5753/2025

1.       Dr. Surendra Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Dungar Dutt
         Sharma, Aged About 64 Years, R/o Ward No. 4, Hathipura
         Bass, Bhadra, Rajasthan.

2.       Dr. Pawan Kumar Vashistha S/o Shri Krishan Nandan,
         Aged About 64 Years, R/o Rambass, Near Goshala, Ward
         No. 26, Rajgarh, Churu.

3.       Shri    Satyanarayan          Shandilya         S/o        Shri    Ramchandra
         Shandilya, Aged About 68 Years, R/o Rajgarh, Churu.

                                                                           ----Petitioners

                                       Versus

1.       The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Additional Chief
         Secretary, Department Of Ayurveda, Government Of
         Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

2.       The Principal Secretary, Department Of Ayurveda And
         Bhartiya Chikitsa, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat,
         Jaipur, Rajasthan.

3.       The Joint/deputy Secretary, Department Of Ayurveda And
         Bhartiya Chikitsa, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat,
         Group-4, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

4.       State    Of     Rajasthan,          Through          Principal        Secretary,
         Department Of Personnel, Government Of Rajasthan,
         Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

5.       The Director, Directorate Of Ayurveda, Ashok Marg,
         Lohagal Road, Ajmer, Rajasthan.

                                                                      ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)            :     Mr. Himanshu Pareek
For Respondent(s)            :     Ms. Anita Rajpurohit




                        (Downloaded on 11/03/2025 at 09:43:40 PM)
 [2025:RJ-JD:13418-DB]                   (2 of 3)                            [CW-5753/2025]


      HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SHRIMALI

Order

10/03/2025

1. After the order was passed by this Court earlier on

20.09.2024 in another petition, new developments have been

brought to the notice of this Court, one of them regarding

dismissal of the Review Petition by the Hon'ble Supreme Court

filed in the case of State of Rajasthan & Ors. Vs. Dr. Mahesh

Chandra Sharma on 15.10.2024, as stated at the bar by learned

counsel for the petitioners.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners has also placed before

this Court order dated 27.09.2024 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme

Court in the case of The State of Rajasthan & Ors. Vs. Pyare

Lal Meena & Ors. (Special Leave to Appeal (C)

No.10560/2024), wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has

clarified that there is no stay on the judgment of the High Court

and further that in the event the outstanding towards salary has

not been paid, the same shall be cleared within a period of one

week. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that in

the present case, the petitioners have retired and crossed the age

of 62 years as on date. Learned counsel for the respondent does

not dispute the aforesaid factual position.

3. In view of the above developments, we need not keep this

petition pending and same is also finally disposed off in terms of

order passed earlier by this Court in the case of Dr. Mahesh

Chandra Sharma & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. and

other connected matters (D.B. Civil Writ Petition

[2025:RJ-JD:13418-DB] (3 of 3) [CW-5753/2025]

No.13496/2021), decided on 13.07.2022. As the petitioners

have retired and crossed the age of 62 years, they shall be

deemed to have continued in service upto 62 years. This will

require the respondents-authority to pass necessary orders

treating them in service till attaining the age of 62 years in

individual cases with consequential benefits of continuity of

service. All other consequential action would also be required to

be taken which include refixation of pension and other benefits.

(CHANDRA PRAKASH SHRIMALI),J (DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J

97-Hanuman/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)