Allowed

Guman Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC21 Dec 2022CW/10753/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Mere sapphire: This single-judge order in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10753/2022 allowed the petitions relying on the ratio of the coordinate bench in Amar Singh Vs. The Jalore Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. & Ors. Consequently, the Court directed the respondents.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to upgrade basic pay of petitioners per Rule 26A RSR within six months with 7.5% interest on accrued amount.

Guman Singh Vs State of Rajasthan — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10753/2022

¶3

Guman Singh S/o Sh. Purakh Singh Rajpurohit, Aged About 63 Years, R/o Village Post Langera, Tehsil Barmer, District Barmer (Raj.).

¶4

Gokal Singh S/o Sh. Tulchharam Choudhary, Aged About 62 Years, R/o Daukiyon Ki Dhani, Khadin, Tehsil Ramsar, District Barmer (Raj.).

¶5

Ratan Lal S/o Sh. Khartharam Ji Choudhary, Aged About 63 Years, R/o Jat Colony, Samdadi Road, Balotra, District Barmer (Raj.).

¶6

Guman Singh S/o Sh. Hadmat Singh Rajpurohit, Aged About 63 Years, R/o Village / Post Kelankot, Panchayat Samiti, Patodi, Tehsil Pachpadra, District Barmer (Raj.).

¶7

----Petitioners

¶8

Versus

¶9

State Of Rajasthan, Cooperative Societies, Nehru Sahkar Bhawan, 22 Godown Circle, Jaipur (Raj.).

¶10

The Barmer Central Cooperative Bank Limited, Barmer Through Its Managing Director At Barmer.

¶11

----Respondents

¶12

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Shashank Sharma.
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. S.S. Choudhary.

¶13

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI Order

¶14

21/12/2022

¶15

Counsel for the petitioners submits that the controversy in question rests decided by a judgment passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Amar Singh Vs. The Jalore Central Coorperative Bank Ltd. & Anr. along with other connected matters; S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6996/2014 wherein the Court held as under:

¶16

(2 of 2)

¶17

[CW-10753/2022]

¶18

“As a consequence of the above discussion, the writ petitions are allowed. The respondents are directed to upgrade the basic pay of the petitioners in accordance with Rule 26A of the RSR by applying the said rule in letter and spirit. The petitioners shall also be entitled to consequential monetary benefits flowing from the above direction. The entire exercise as directed above shall be completed within a period of six months, failing which the accrued amount shall carry interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum.”

¶19

It has further been submitted that the ratio as laid down in Amar Singh’s case (supra) has been affirmed by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of The Barmer Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. Vs. Bhanwar Singh Khichi & Ors.; D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No.1157/2017 and further by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Barmer Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. Vs. Bhanwar Singh Khichi & Ors.; Special Leave to Appeal No.10638/2018.Counsels for the respondents are not in a position to refute the submissions so far as the judgment passed in Amar Singh’s case is concerned and so far as the same being applicable in the present matter is concerned.

¶20

In view of the above submissions the present writ petition is allowed in terms of the judgment as passed in Amar Singh’s case(supra).

¶21

(ARUN BHANSALI),J

¶22

336-pradeep/-

Guman Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Guman Singh 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pradeep Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Kanwar Lal Tak Vs the Union of India

Rishi Raj Singh Ranawat Vs State of Rajasthan

Ashish Chaubey Vs State of Rajasthan

Parasmal Vs State of Rajasthan

Banshiram Vs State of Rajasthan