Disposed

Murari Lal v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC18 Dec 2018CW/10237/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged an order directing the petitioner to report to Panchayat Samiti, claiming arrears in salary. The High Court directed respondents to pass appropriate orders on posting and due salary within two weeks of the petitioner's representation and disposed of the petition.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is disposed of. Respondents with two weeks to pass appropriate orders on posting and due salary after receiving petitioner's representation.

Murari Lal Vs State of Rajasthan — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ No. 10237/2018

¶3

Murari Lal S/o Shri Hardwari Lal, Aged About 51 Years, New Peerkhana, Ward No. 17, Pilibanga, Tehsil Pilibanga, District Hanumangarh.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department Of Rural Development And Panchayati Raj., Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur

¶7

Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Hanumangarh, District Hanumangarh.

¶8

Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Pilibanga, District Hanumangarh.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. S.D. Goswami. For Respondent(s) : Mr. K.S. Solanki for Mr. Manish Patel, AGC.

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI

¶12

Order

¶13

18/12/2018

¶14

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved against the order dated 4.7.2018 (Annex.10), whereby, the petitioner has been directed to report at the office of Panchayat Samiti.

¶15

Notices were ordered to be issued on 15.7.2018, however, no interim order was granted.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since passing of the order dated 4.7.2018, the petitioner has not been assigned posting at any other place and that the petitioner has not been paid salary of two months, which is still due and, therefore, the

¶17

(2 of 2)

¶18

[CW-10237/2018]

¶19

respondents may be directed to accord posting to the petitioner and pay him the due salary.

¶20

In the circumstances of the case, wherein, the order dated 4.7.2018 (Annex.10) was passed by the respondents directing the petitioner to report at the office of Panchayat Samiti and it is claimed by the petitioner that two months’ salary is still due, the respondents are directed to pass appropriate orders pertaining to petitioner’s posting and regarding his due salary.

¶21

The petitioner would be free to make a representation indicating the facts pertaining to the due salary and posting. On filing of such representation, the respondents would pass appropriate orders within a period of two weeks from the date a representation alongwith a certified copy of this order is placed before the respondents.

¶22

With the above directions, the writ petition filed by the petitioner stands disposed of.

¶23

(ARUN BHANSALI),J

¶24

69-Sumit/-

Murari Lal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Murari Lal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Govind Kumar Meghwal Vs State of Rajasthan

Balu Ram and Ors. Vs State of Raj. and Ors.

Dilip Katara Vs State of Rajasthan

Anil Kumar Vs the University Grants Commission

Rajendra Kumar Joshi Vs Rsrtc and Ors.

Natwar Lal Vs Distt.and Sessions Judge, Dungarpur and Anr.