Disposed

Ram Chandra v. State of Raj and Ors.

Rajasthan HC5 Feb 2018CW/2292/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order disposes of a writ petition by directing the petitioner to submit a comprehensive representation regarding his service/benefits claim. The respondents are directed to consider and decide it via a reasoned order within three months.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to consider petitioner's representation within three months via reasoned order; writ application disposed.

Ram Chandra 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 Writ Petition No. 2292 / 2018

¶3

Ram Chandra Constable (Driver ) No. 825, Son of Shri Late Sh. Mangi Lal Tiwari, Aged About 47 Years, Working At O/o Superintendent of Police, Pratap Garh (Rajasthan).

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Rajasthan Through Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Home, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶7

Principal Secretary, Department of Finance, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶8

DGP, Rajasthan Police, Lal Kothi, Jaipur.

¶9

Superintendent of Police, Pratap Garh (Rajasthan)

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. M.S. Raghav/Mr. Vishwas Saini For Respondent(s) :

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA

¶13

Order

¶14

05/02/2018

¶15

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. M.S. Raghav/Mr.Vishwas Saini

¶16

For Respondent(s) :

¶17

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA

¶18

Order

¶19

05/02/2018

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the very outset, submits that the controversy raised in the instant writ application stands resolved in view of the adjudication made by a Division Bench in a batch of intra-court appeal lead case being D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) Number 2056 of 2014: The Home Secretary,

¶21

(2 of 3)

¶22

[CW-2292/2018]

¶23

Government of Rajasthan & Ors. Versus Shyoram & Anr., decided on 2^nd July, 2015, declining the intra-court appeals observing thus:

¶24

“3. An interim order was passed by this Court on 27.02.2015, on the ground that against the judgment passed by the Division Bench in State of Rajasthan & Anr. Vs. Jagdish Prasad & Anr. (D.B. Civil Special Appeal(W) No.161/2012), the Supreme Court has granted an interim order in the contempt proceedings for implementation of the judgment of the Division Bench. This Court had passed the interim order on 27.02.2015, awaiting the orders, to be passed by the Supreme Court in the Civil Appeals.

¶25

We are informed that Civil Appeal No.1766 of 2015- State of Rajasthan And Ors. Vs. Banney Khan, and other connected civil Appeals, have been dismissed by the Supreme Court on 12.05.2015, with the following order:-

¶26

“We have heard learned counsel for the parties to the lis and carefully perused the material available on record.

¶27

In our considered opinion, we do not find any infirmity in the impugned judgmetns and orders passed by the High Court. Accordingly, the Civil Appeals are dismissed.”

¶28

With the dismissal of the Civil Appeals by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the orders passed by learned Single Judge, as affirmed by the Division Bench, have been confirmed and have become final.

¶29

The Special Appeals are, consequently, dismissed.

¶30

A copy of the judgment will be placed in the connected files.”

¶31

(3 of 3)

¶32

[CW-2292/2018]

¶33

It is further contended that for the present; the petitioner would be satisfied, if the State-respondents are directed to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner, within a time frame, in the backdrop of the settled legal position in the case of Shyoram & Anr. (supra), which has also been upheld by the Supreme Court declining SLP on 12^th May, 2015; which he is ready and willing to address within two weeks hereinafter.

¶34

In view of the limited prayer addressed; the instant writ proceedings are closed with a direction to the petitioner to address a comprehensive representation enclosing a copy of the order in the case of Shyoram & Anr. (supra).

¶35

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.

¶36

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

¶37

(VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA)J.

¶38

SS/93

Ram Chandra v. State of Raj and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Chandra 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

State of Rajasthan Vs Phoolchand @ Phooliya

Shiv Dayal Singh Vs Shri Naresh Pal Gangwar and Ors.

Shivam Fabrics Vs Narsingh Textiles

Dev Karan Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Mukesh Vs State Home Departmentanr

Girraj Singh Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.