Disposed

Rupa Ram Jat v. R S R T C and Ors.

Rajasthan HC10 Apr 2018CW/7609/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order disposed of a writ petition where the petitioner submitted that a coordinate bench's decision in Prahlad Singh resolved the controversy. The court closed the proceedings conditioned on the petitioner filing a comprehensive representation, with a direction to the state to decide it within twelve weeks.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition closed with direction to petitioner to submit a complete representation; State directed to decide within 12 weeks.

Rupa Ram Jat Vs R S R T C 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. 7609/2018

¶3

Rupa Ram Jat S/o Shri Nanu Ram, Aged About 61 Years, R/o Plot No. 38, Saraswati Vihar, 100 Ft. Road, Kalwar Road, Jhotwara, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation Through Its Chairman Cum Managing Director, Head Office, Jaipur.

¶7

Executive Director (Administration), Rsrtc, Jaipur.

¶8

Chief Pension And Gratuity Officer, Rsrtc, Head Office, Jaipur.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rahul Ghiya For Respondent(s) :

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA

¶12

Order

¶13

10/04/2018

¶14

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 Coordinate Bench of this Court in a batch of writ applications lead case being S. B. Civil Writ petition Number 14748/2014: Prahlad Singh Versus The Managing Director, Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation & Ors., decided on 28^th September, 2015.

¶15

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, which he is ready and willing to address within two weeks hereinafter.

¶16

(2 of 2) [CW-7609/2018]

¶17

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 Prahlad Singh (supra).

¶18

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 twelve weeks from the date of receipt of the representation along with a certified copy of this order.

¶19

In case, claim of the petitioners is found covered by the adjudication aforesaid in the case of Prahlad Singh (supra), the petitioners be also accorded the same benefit.

¶20

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

¶21

(VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA)J.

¶22

SS/167

Rupa Ram Jat v. R S R T C and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rupa Ram Jat v. R S R T C 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

Shankar Khandelwal Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Ramesh Matha Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Shankar Lal Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Rakesh Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Bajranglal Balai Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Jitendra Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp