Dismissed

Union of India and Ors. v. Durg Singh

Rajasthan HC10 Sept 2018WRW/2/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan at Jodhpur condensed a 109-day delay in filing a writ review petition. The bench dismissed the review as the contentions were already dealt with in the original decision, no reasoning was offered to challenge the Tribunal's order on salary parity, and no new case for condonation of delay was made.

What did the court decide?

Review petition dismissed. Delay in filing condoned.

Union of India and Ors. Vs Durg Singh — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

D.B. Writ Review No. 2/2018

¶3

Union Of India Through The Secretary To The Government Of India, Ministry Of Communication And Information Technology, Department Of Posts, Dak Bhawan, Sansad Marg, New Delhi

¶4

The Post Master General, Rajasthan Western Region, Jodhpur.

¶5

The Superintendent Of Post Office, Nagaur Division, District Nagaur Raj..

¶6

----Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

Durg Singh S/o Shri Guman Singh, Resident Of Village And Post Banthdi, Koliya Nagaur, District Nagaur, At Present Employed On The Post Of Gdsbpm Cum Gsda/gdmc-Viii And Po Banthdi, Koliya Nagaur, District Nagaur Raj..

¶9

----Respondent

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Narpen Shanker Acharya on behalf of Mr.Sanjeet Purohit For Respondent(s) : -----

¶11

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

¶12

Order

¶13

10/09/2018

¶14

Civil Misc. Application No.07/2018:-

¶15

For the reasons mentioned in the application 109 days delay

¶16

in fling the petition is condoned.

¶17

Writ Review No. 2/2018:-

¶18

All contentions urged in the review petition have been noted and dealt with in the decision dated 11.05.2017.

¶19

(2 of 2)

¶20

[WRW-2/2018]

¶21

Appellants contention that the respondent was declared surplus and was thereafter redeployed and thus would not entitle him to protection of the last drawn salary have been noted by us and dealt with by extracting the relevant portion of the decision passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal in paragraphs No.6 and 7 of our decision, review whereof is prayed for.

¶22

Principally, parity with one Narendra Kishore and Ramji Lal was highlighted by the Central Administrative Tribunal and while deciding the writ petition had highlighted that this claim on parity was not controverted by the writ petitioner.

¶23

Even in the review petition not a word has been pleaded as to why the decision by the Tribunal which accorded parity to the respondent with Nand Kishore and Ramji Lal is not justified.

¶24

The review petition is dismissed.

¶25

(PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J (PRADEEP NANDRAJOG),CJ

¶26

Kshama Dixit/1

Union of India and Ors. v. Durg Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union of India and Ors. v. Durg Singh

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

State and Ors. Vs Vikas Nehra and Anr.

Ex H/C Sunahari Lal Vs Union of India and Ors.

Akshay Kumar Sanghi and Anr. Vs Ratan Kumar Sanghi and Ors.

State of Raj. and Ors. Vs Rajendra Kumar Bhola

N.I.C.Ltd., Udaipur Vs Smt.Shanta Devi and Ors.

State and Ors. Vs Smt. Sukhi Kanwar and Anr.