Disposed

Shishupal Verma v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC16 Dec 2022CW/18964/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, a police constable, filed a writ petition claiming resolution of his controversy based on a coordinate bench judgment. The High Court allowed the petition by directing the petitioner to submit a comprehensive representation and directing state authorities to decide it within three months. The petition and stay application were disposed accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to submit comprehensive representation; State Respondents directed to decide within three months.

Shishupal Verma Vs the 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. 18964/2022

¶3

Shishupal Verma S/o Sh. Pokhar Mal Verma, Aged About 47 Years, Head Constable No. 05/ct No. 5429/528 Present Posted - Reserve Police Line, Jaipur City, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary, Department Of Finance (Rules), Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶7

The Police Commissioner, Commissionerate, Rajasthan Police (Hq), Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶8

Superintendent Of Police (Hq), Jaipur City, Jaipur.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. S. Raghav

¶11

JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

¶12

Order

¶13

16/12/2022

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the very outset, submits that the controversy raised in the instant writ petition stands resolved in view of the adjudication made by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Kuldeep Singh & Ors. Versus State of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3926/2013,decided on 26.04.2013.

¶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, in the backdrop of the adjudication in the case of Kuldeep Singh & Ors. (supra), which he is ready and willing to address within two weeks hereinafter.

¶16

(2 of 2)

¶17

[CW-18964/2022]

¶18

In view of the limited prayer addressed; the instant writ petition proceedings are closed with a direction to the petitioner to address a comprehensive representation before the respondents enclosing a copy of the order in the case of Kuldeep Singh & Ors. (supra).

¶19

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.

¶20

With the observations and directions, as indicated above, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶21

6. The stay application also stands disposed of.

¶22

(DINESH MEHTA),J

¶23

279-A.Arora/-

Shishupal Verma v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shishupal Verma v. the 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Savita Vs State of Rajasthan

Khemraj Garg @ Khimraj Garg Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramesh Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan

Pradeep Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan

Raju Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Suhani Gandhi Vs State of Rajasthan