Disposed

Narain Lal Sharma v. State of Raj and Ors.

Rajasthan HC19 Jul 2018CW/12638/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition regarding selection grade claims, the High Court of Rajasthan disposed of the proceedings by directing the petitioner to submit a comprehensive representation within two weeks, noting that a Coordinate Bench previously allowed the claim.

What did the court decide?

Direction to petitioner to file a comprehensive representation within two weeks and directed respondents to consider it within three months.

Narain Lal Sharma Vs State of Raj and Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writs No. 12638/2018

¶3

Narain Lal Sharma S/o Late Shri Mohan Lal Sharma , R/o House No. 11, Ganga Maata Ka Mandir, Sanganeri Gate Ke Bahar, Imitation Dharmshala Ke Pass, Jaipur Rajasthan At Present Retd From The Post Of Udc On 31.12.2016 From Of Executive Engineer, City Division-Ii, Pwd, Jacob Road, Civil Lines, Jaipur.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

1. State Of Rajasthan Through Its Secretary, Public Works Department , Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶7

Chief Engineer, Pwd , Jacob Road, Civil Lines, Jaipur.

¶8

Superintending Engineer, City Circle, Zone-1, Pwd , Jacob Road, Civil Lines, Jaipur.

¶9

Executive Engineer, City Division-Ii, Pwd , Jacob Road, Civil Lines, Jaipur.

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Imran Khan For Respondent(s) :

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA

¶13

Order

¶14

19/07/2018

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the claim of the petitioner stand resolved in view of the adjudication by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Vashudev Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.: 2005 (3) DNJ (Raj.) 1509, observing thus:

¶16

“4.The petitioner though initially appointed in work charge cadre as a Store Munshi w.e.f. 14.5.1973 but admittedly he was taken on regular ministerial cadre of Government of Rajasthan on 29.11.1990. The petitioner, therefore,

¶17

(2 of 3)

¶18

[CW-12638/2018]

¶19

became a Government servant w.e.f. 29.11.1990 as such he was in regular cadre prior to 25.1.1992. The notification dated 25.1.1992, therefore, is having application upon him. The appointment to the petitioner was given in work charge cadre in accordance with Rules, therefore, the respondents are required to take into consideration the services rendered by the petitioner even in work charge capacity while reckoning the service period for grant of selection grades. The petitioner was conferred with semi permanent status on completion of two years of services and from that day regular pay scales were allowed to him. The respondents, therefore, are required to compute the services of the petitioner for grant of selection grade from the date semi permanent status was allowed to him. The same view is taken by this Court in the case of Mohan Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4146/1999 decided on 10.8.2005.

¶20

Accordingly, this petition for writ succeeds and, therefore, the same is allowed. The respondents are directed to allow selection grades to the petitioner as provided in the notification dated 25.1.1992 by taking into consideration his services from the date the semi permanent status was conferred upon him. The respondents shall consider the case of the petitioner for the grant of selection grades in view of the directions above within a period of six months from today. No order as to costs.”

¶21

Learned counsel further submits that for the present, the petitioner would be satisfied, if the State-respondents are directed to consider and decide the representation within a time frame, for representation already has failed to evoke any response.

¶22

In view of the limited prayer addressed; the instant writ proceedings are closed with a direction to the petitioner to address a comprehensive representation to the respondents within two weeks hereinafter.

¶23

(3 of 3) [CW-12638/2018]

¶24

In case, a representation is so addressed within the aforesaid period, the State-respondents are directed to consider and decide the same by a reasoned and speaking order as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law. However, in no case later than three months from the date of receipt of the representation along with a certified copy of this order.

¶25

With the observations and directions, as indicated above, the writ application stands disposed off.

¶26

(VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA),J

¶27

SS/79

Narain Lal Sharma v. State of Raj and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narain Lal Sharma v. State of Raj and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Karunesh Kumar Sharma and Ors. Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Shyam Lal Tiwari Andors Vs State Education Dep Ors.

Nand Kishore Sharma and Ors. Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Anil Chouhan Andors Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Ashok Kumar Suthar Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Dr Deepak Sharma Vs State Education Department Anr.