Disposed

Inderpal Singh S/O Shri Rameshwar Lal (Head Constable B.No 123) v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC16 Feb 2022CW/2636/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Division Bench disposed of writ petitions challenging validity of pay rules amendments affecting Assured Career Progression benefits. Court directed government to reconsider the issue by February 28, 2022, halted further recoveries, and ordered refund of recoveries already made.

What did the court decide?

Govt to reconsider amendment issue by Feb 28, 2022; no further recovery; refund recoveries already made.

Inderpal Singh S/O Shri Rameshwar Lal… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDJCATIJRE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 263612022

¶3

¶4

Inderpal Singh S/o Shri Rameshwar Lal (Head Constable B.no 123), Aged About 51 Years, R/o Village Papada, Tehsil Udaipurwati, District Jhunjhunu.

¶5

Babulal Meena S/o Shri Ramjilal Meena (B.no. 2917), Aged About 50 Years, R/o Village Post ,Kaneti, Tehsil Reeni, District Alwar.

¶6

$&&&nt Kha Asi, R/o 8-245

¶7

Abdul abbaaqs . . a ', ;? I . _t*,&.k~~_ ,.i_ll Sanjay P$j$$rI a-fwiiia, Distrct J ;p&&?.fi,, m . , ,

¶8

At 7' S/o Shri Bhoop Singh Yad 5, ".:A :%>&A +.P.~ Village Post Shirnla, Tehsil

¶9

<4@Ju!'.: k i'J ,

¶10

¶11

1;hwar Singh S/o Shri Phool Chand Head constable 4701, " '.-.--,

¶12

R/o Village Khatoti (S$$% idpur, Tehsil Nar-

¶13

d Driver 5775, ct Bhratpur.

¶14

About 48 Years (ConR/o Plot No. 56, Jagate, Jhotwar, Dis-

¶15

Surendra Kumad bout 49 year4

¶16

2021), Aged A trict Tonk.

¶17

Sita Ram S/o Shri Tunda Ram Meena Fc 2945, R/O Village Post Dugarpur, Tehsil Lalsot, District Dausa.

¶18

Naresh Kumar S/o Shri Gyarshi Lal Fc 3380, R/o Village Post Kitpura Napawali, Tehsil Neem Ka Thana, District Sikar.

¶19

Shubhash Chandra Sharma S/o Shri Moharsingh Sharma Asi, R/o D-265 A, Jagdamba Nagar, Hirapura, Behind Power House, Ajmer Rd , Jaipur.

¶20

----Petitioners

¶21

Versus

¶22

1. The State Of ~ajasthan, Through Additional Chief Secretary, Department Of Home, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur

¶23

2. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Finance, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur

¶24

The Director General Of Police, Police Headquarter, Lalkothi, Jaipur

¶25

Deputy Commissioner Of Police (Headquarter), Commissionarate, Jaipur.

¶26

For Pet For Re:

¶27

State of Rajasthan provided as under:-

¶28

he Division Bench has

¶29

'In these petitions, the main controversy is with respect to validity and legality of the notification dated 30th October, 2017 issued by the Government of Rajasthan, Department of Finance. Under this notification, the Rajasthan Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008 came to be amended. '

¶30

It is not necessary to go into the details of these amendments. Suffice it to note that the grievance of the petitioners is that by virtue of these amendments in the revised Pay Rules, with retrospective effect, the grade pay in several cases have been so changed as to deprive the pe-

¶31

titioners of actual benefits of Assured Career Progression Scheme. Since in some cases, the Government has also initiated recoveries on the basis of these amendments, the petitioners had also prayed for interim protection. In some cases where recoveries have commenced, the Court has protected the petitioners. In some cases of the pensioners recoveries in part or full may have been made.

¶32

The learned Advocate General stated that: such protection against non-petitioners has also been ordered in cases of those persons who are affected by these amendments.

was taken

pe of this Commit-

tee involves o

vocate Genera

e learned Adthree months ries would be

¶38

vernment, on its

¶39

e that in some sion is taken, of course, subject to outcome of the decision of the Government and further order of the Court in case the controversy raises.

¶40

Under the circumstances, all these petitions are disposed of with the following directions:(i) Let the Government reconsider the entire is: sue as is stated before us. Final decision preferably may be taken by 28th February, 2022. (ii) After the decision is taken by the Government, if any of the grievances of the petitioners survive, it would be open for them to file fresh petitions.

¶41

(iii) Till fresh decision is taken, the State Government shall not make any further recovery on the

¶42

basis of the notification dated 30th October, 2017.

¶43

(iv) Recoveries already made from the pensioners would be refunded, subject to final decision of the Government, subject to further challenge.

¶44

We are informed that in some of the petitions additional issues have also been raised. None of these issues would get affected by this order. It would be open for the petitioners to file an independent petition, as may be advised subject to all objections of the Government which are kept open.

¶45

All pending applications are also disposed of."

¶46

(MAN01 KUMAR

¶47

(AKIL KURESHI),CI

¶48

NAVAL KISHORl34

Inderpal Singh S/O Shri Rameshwar Lal (Head Constable B.No 123) v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Inderpal Singh S/O Shri Rameshwar Lal (Head Constable B.No 123) 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prem Mohan Vs State of Rajasthan

Gitesh Pancholi Son of Shri Arunesh Pancholi Vs State of Rajasthan

Jagdish Prashad S/O Harishankar Vs the State of Rajasthan

Laxmi Narayan Sharma S/O Shri Ram Charan Sharma Vs the State of Rajasthan

M/S Jaya It Consultants Private Limited Vs the State of Rajasthan

Pawan Narayaniya S/O Dr. Ashok Narayaniya, Vs Rajasthan High Court