Disposed

Sanju Khilery v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC8 Jul 2022CW/6681/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Division Bench disposed of a writ petition regarding recoveries from Government servants under a 2017 notification. Relying on a prior coordinate bench direction for the Government to reconsider the issue, the Court directed that no further recovery shall be effected pending the Government's decision and directed the filing of fresh petitions thereafter.

What did the court decide?

Directed that no recovery of amounts already paid shall be effected under the impugned notification pending a final decision by the Government.

Sanju Khilery Vs State of Rajasthan — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6681/2020

¶3

Sanju Khilery W/o Shri Maniram, Daughter Of Shri Bhanwar Lal, Aged About 36 Years, By Caste Jat, Resident Of Sagar Road, Plat No. 24, District Bikaner, Presently Working As Constable No. 463, 10Th Bn. - R.a.c., Bikaner

¶4

Chandrakala Shekhawat D/o Shri Bajarang Singh Shekhawat, Aged About 30 Years, By Caste Rajput, Resident Of V.p.o. Rajaldesar, Tehsil Ratangarh, District Churu, Presently Working As Constable No. 716, 10Th Bn. - R.a.c., Bikaner

¶5

Nirmla Kumari D/o Shri Ram Singh Garodia, Aged About 34 Years, By Caste Jat, Resident Of Village Garodia Ki Dhani, Post Khulhario Ka Bas, Tehsil Chirawa, District Jhunjhunu, Presently Working As Constable No. 335, 10Th Bn. - R.a.c., Bikaner

¶6

Bhanwar Lal S/o Shri Balbir Singh, Aged About 38 Years, By Caste Jat, Resident Of V.p.o. Jheegar Badi, Tehsil And District Sikar, Presently Working As Constable No. 184, 10Th Bn. - R.a.c., Bikaner

¶7

Pabu Ram S/o Shri Lalu Ram, Aged About 42 Years, By Caste Bishnoi, Resident Of V.p.o. Barjasar, Tehsil Phalodi, District Jodhpur, Presently Working As Constable No. 242, Commandant, Rajasthan Police Training Center, Jodhpur

¶8

Praveen Choudhary S/o Shri Nimbaram Choudhary, Aged About 31 Years, By Caste Jat, Resident Of Plot Number K10B Bhagat Ki Kothi Near Railway Station, District Jodhpur Presently Working As Constable No. 748, Superintendent Of Police, Jodhpur Rural, Jodhpur

¶9

----Petitioners

¶10

Versus

¶11

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary To The Government, Department Of Finance, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶12

Principal Secretary To The Government, Department Of Home Affairs, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur

¶13

Director General Of Police, Rajasthan, Jaipur

¶14

Commandant, 10Th Bn R.a.c., Bikaner

¶15

(2 of 3)

¶16

[CW-6681/2020]

¶17

Commandant, Rajasthan Police Training Center, Jodhpur

¶18

Superintendent Of Police, Jodhpur Rural, Jodhpur

¶19

----Respondents

¶20

For Petitioner(s) For Respondent(s)

¶21

: Mr. Ankit Choudhary

¶22

: Mr. Sandeep Shah, Sr. Advocate-cumAAG assisted by Mr. Abhimanyu Singh Rathore

¶23

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

¶24

Order

¶25

08/07/2022

¶26

This writ petition calls into question the action of the respondents in proposing to effect recoveries from the petitioners Government servants as a consequence of the notification dated 30^th October, 2017 issued by the State Government.

¶27

Identical controversy was examined and decided by a Coordinate Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 25.11.2017 passed in a bunch of writ petitions led by Santosh Sharma vs State of Rajasthan (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5920/2021) observing as below:-

¶28

(i) Let the Government reconsider the entire issue as is stated before us. Final decision preferably may be taken by 28^th February, 2022.

¶29

(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.

¶30

(iii) Till fresh decision is taken, the State Government shall not make any further recovery on the basis of the notification dated 30^th October, 2017.

¶31

(3 of 3)

¶32

[CW-6681/2020]

¶33

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

¶34

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.”

¶35

As a consequence to the above directions, the State Government has issued two memoranda (No.F. 14(88)FD/Rules/2008 and No.F.15(88)FD/Rules/2017) dated 27.02.2022 so as to resolve the controversy. Consequently, it is hereby directed that no recovery of the amounts already paid to the petitioners shall be effected as a consequence of Notification dated 30.10.2017. In case, the petitioners are aggrieved of the memoranda dated 27.02.2022, they shall be at liberty to challenge the same as per law.

¶36

The writ petition is disposed of in these terms.

¶37

(KULDEEP MATHUR),J

¶38

(SANDEEP MEHTA),J

¶39

5-Sudhir Asopa/-

Sanju Khilery v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanju Khilery 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

All India Tourist Permit Bus Owners Association Vs State of Rajasthan

Jain Travels, Jodhpur Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt. Kanta Jain Vs State of Rajasthan

Bar Council of India Vs Chairman, Bar Council of Rajasthan

Tilok Chand Vs State of Rajasthan

Sunrise Society Udaipur Vs State of Rajasthan