Allowed

Sajjan Singh Solanki v. Ajmer Vidhyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd.

Rajasthan HC20 Nov 2023CW/15461/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan allowed the writ petition, quashing recovery orders dated 10.04.2019 and 30.04.2019. The court directed the respondents to refund Rs.68,537 to the petitioner along with 9% annual interest. Re-fixation of pension was noted as prospective only.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of orders dated 10.04.2019 and 30.04.2019; refund of Rs.68,537 with 9% annual interest to be paid within two months.

Sajjan Singh Solanki Vs Ajmer Vidhyut… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023:RJ-JD:39949]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15461/2019

¶4

Sajjan Singh Solanki S/o Shri Bhanwar Singh Solanki, Aged About 60 Years, By Caste Solanki, R/o Plot No. 53-A, Pratap Nagar, Shri Ram Colony, Udaipur (Rajasthan). (Retired From The Post Of Helper-1, Office Of Assistant Engineer (St-Ii), Ajmer Vidhyut Vitaran Nigam Limited, Madhuban (Udaipur Circle) Udaipur (Rajasthan).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

Ajmer Vidhyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd., Through Its Managing Director, Vidhyut Bhawan, Pancheel, Ajmer (Rajasthan).

¶8

Chief Engineer (Udaipur Circle), Ajmer Vidhyut Vitaran Nigam Limited, Udaipur (Rajasthan)

¶9

Assistant Engineer (St-Ii), Ajmer Vidhyut Vitaran Nigam Limited, Udaipur (Rajasthan)

¶10

Senior Accounts Officer (Pension), Ajmer Vidhyut Vitaran Nigam Limited, Udaipur (Rajasthan)

¶11

Accounts Officer (Udaipur Circle), Ajmer Vidhyuit Vitaran Nigam Limited, Udaipur (Rajasthan)

¶12

----Respondents

¶13

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shiv Kumar Vyas. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Pradeep Sharma.

¶14

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

¶15

Order

¶16

20/11/2023

¶17

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved against the order of recovery dated 10.04.2019 (Annex.-9) and the order dated 30.04.2019 (Annex.10) passed by the respondents seeking refund of the amount of Rs.68,537/alongwith interest and for seeking re-fixation based on the unamended order.

[2023:RJ-JD:39949]

[CW-15461/2019]

(2 of 3)

Learned counsel for the petitioner does not press for re- fixation and submits that the rest of the issue raised in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court in Hari Lal Veragi vs. Ajmer Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Limited & Ors. : S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1864/2015, decided on 18.05.2015 and Ramesh Chandra Joshi vs. Ajmer Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. & Ors.: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.7645/2012, decided on 02.08.2016, wherein this Court relying on judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab & Ors. vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer): (2014) 8 SCC 883 has directed as

¶22

under:-

¶23

“Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed in

¶24

the following terms:-

¶25

The impugned order (Annexure-2) dated 30.04.2012 whereby, the respondents effected the recovery of Rs.2,29,891/- from the petitioner’s terminal benefits is hereby quashed and set aside. The respondents are directed to reimburse the said amount to the petitioner with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of recovery till the date of actual payment. For future payments accruing to the petitioner towards pension, the respondents, if so advised, shall be entitled to revise the same after making refixation as per the record in case rules so permit. No order as to costs.”

¶26

Learned counsel for the respondents is not in a position to controvert the said aspect.

¶27

In view of the above, the present writ petition filed by the petitioner to the extent pressed is also allowed.

¶28

The orders dated 10.04.2019 (Annex.9) and 30.04.2019 (Annex.10) are quashed and set aside. The amount of Rs.68,537/recovered from the petitioner be refunded back alongwith interest

[2023:RJ-JD:39949]

[CW-15461/2019]

(3 of 3)

@ 9% per annum from the date of recovery till the date of actual payment.

¶33

The needful may be done by the respondents within a period of two months from the date a certified copy of this order is placed before the respondents.

¶34

(KULDEEP MATHUR),J

¶35

94-Prashant/-

Sajjan Singh Solanki v. Ajmer Vidhyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sajjan Singh Solanki v. Ajmer Vidhyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd.

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

Radha Mohan Bairwa Vs Jvvnl., Jodhpur and Ors.

Rakesh Katara Vs State of Rajasthan

Shankar Lal Vs Smt. Aparna Arora

Kiranpal Kaur Vs Shri Mukul S. Sharma

Smt. Maina Devi Vs Shri O.P. Bishnoi

Abhay Singh Bhati Vs State of Rajasthan