Dismissed

Heera Ram Choudhary v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC21 Dec 2023CW/13851/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Joint petitioners, holding promoted posts on Patey Vetan basis, sought service benefits. The Court referred a coordinate bench order and directed extension of pay and service benefits of the promoted post to those who actually performed duties there, subject to disqualification if demoted.

What did the court decide?

Directed that service benefits including pay of the promoted post be extended to petitioners who performed duties on the promoted post on Patey Vetan basis.

Heera Ram Choudhary Vs State of Rajasthan — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023:RJ-JD:45031]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7752/2019

¶4

Raj Kumar Sidana S/o Inder Mal Sidana, Aged About 67 Years, Caste- Arora, Resident Of- 92- N Block, Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of Education (Secondary, Primary And Language), Secretariat, Jaipur. Official E- Mail [email protected].

¶8

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Director, Directorate Of Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner. Official E-Mail Id- [email protected].

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

Connected With

¶11

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13851/2021

¶12

Heera Ram Choudhary S/o Himmaram Choudhary, Aged About 66 Years, Village Thakarwas Bhera Kuraliya, Post Banjakuri, Tehsil Jaitaran, District Pali.

¶13

----Petitioner

¶14

Versus

¶15

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department Of Education (Secondary, Primary And Language), Secretariat, Jaipur. Official E-Mail [email protected]

¶16

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Director, Directorate Of Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner. Official E-Mail Id-Dir.dse@ Rajasthan.gov.in

¶17

----Respondents

¶18

For Petitioner(s)	: Dr.Kshamendra Mathur.
For Respondent(s)	: Mr.Hemant Choudhary, Govt.Counsel
	Mr.Vishal Jangid,Dy.G.C.

¶19

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

ORDER

[2023:RJ-JD:45031]

[CW-7752/2019]

(2 of 2)

21/12/2023

Learned counsel for the parties jointly submitted that the controversy involved in these writ petitions is covered by a batch of writ petitions led by SBCWP No. 6653/2023 (Deendayal Garg Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.) decided by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 24.5.2023.

¶26

In view of the joint statement made by the learned counsel for the parties at the Bar, it is directed that both the petitioners, who held the promoted post on Patey Vetan basis before their regular promotion by DPC shall be extended all the service benefits including pay etc. of the post which was held by them on officiating promotion on the basis of Patey Vetan . It is made clear that the benefit of pay etc. will be granted to those persons only, who had actually performed work/duties on the promoted post.

¶27

Needless to observe, if any of the petitioners was demoted then he would not be entitled for remuneration for the period for which, he had not performed the actual duties against the promoted post.

¶28

The writ petitions as also the stay applications stand disposed of.

¶29

All pending applications are also disposed of.

¶30

A copy of this order be placed in both the files.

¶31

(KULDEEP MATHUR),J

¶32

/tarun goyal/ Suppl.No.1 & 2

Heera Ram Choudhary v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Heera Ram Choudhary 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

Amar Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Suresh Dutt Joshi Vs Shri Pawan Kumar Goyal

Ambuja Cements Limited Vs Sunder Lal

Renu Choudhary Vs State of Rajasthan

Ram Kumar Lodha Vs the State of Rajasthan

Raghuveer Singh Bhati Vs the State of Rajasthan