Allowed

Jagdish Prasad Narad v. the Director Medical Andhealthandors

Rajasthan HC17 May 2023CW/6535/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Division Bench disposed of the writ petition by relying on the settled principles from Govind Dan Charan. The judge held that the petitioner, being similarly situated to those in that judgment, is entitled to the selection grade, pay scale fixation, and revised pension benefits upon retirement.

What did the court decide?

Quashed order dated 7.9.2009 and notesheet endorsement dated 24.5.2000; directed grant of selection grade, revision of pay scale, and revision of pension and retiral benefits with interest.

Jagdish Prasad Narad Vs the Director… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023/RJJP/011189]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6535/2010

¶4

Jagdish Prasad Narad son of Shri Ram Dayalji Narad, aged about 69 years, resident of Ameri Gate Issa Mohalla, Baswa, District Dausa, Rajasthan.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

he Director, Medical & Health Services, Rajasthan, Jaipur. 2. The Chief Medical & Health Officer-I, Mini Health Bhawan, Near Devi mandir, Behind Mental Hospital, Sethi Colony Jaipur. 3. The Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur, through its Registrar.

¶8

----Respondents

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Narendra Mishra For Respondent(s) : None.

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

¶11

Order

¶12

17/05/2023

¶13

Instant petition has been filed by the petitioner with the

¶14

following prayer:

¶15

“It is therefore most respectfully prayed that this writ petition may kindly be allowed and by an appropriate writ, order or direction the order of the learned Tribunal dated 7.9.2009 may kindly be declared to be illegal and the same may kindly be quashed and set aside; by further appropriate writ, order or direction, the decision contained in notesheet endorsement dated 24.5.2000 may kindly be declared to be illegal and the same may kindly be quashed and the respondents may kindly be directed to grant selection grade of Rs.1640-2900 to the petitioner on completion of 27 years of service w.e.f. the date when he completed 27 years of the service with arrears throughout and interest@24% per annum. The respondents may further be directed to revise pay scale of the

(2 of 3)

[2023/RJJP/011189]

[CW-6535/2010]

petitioner on the basis of above third selection grade of Rs.1640-2900 as and when the pay scales have been revised in future and then pay him the arrears with interest @24% per annum. By further appropriate writ, order or direction since the petitioner has retired during the pendency of the appeal, the respondents may be directed to revise his pension, gratuity, commutated pension and leave encashment etc. and pay him the revised retiral benefits with interest @24% per annum.

¶20

Any other order which this Hon’ble Court considers expedient, just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be granted in favour of the petitioner.

¶21

Cost of this writ petition may kindly be awarded in favour of the humble petitioner.”

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the controversy involved in this petition has already been decided by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Govind Dan Charan vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. (DB Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No.1068/2014) . Counsel submits that instant petition be disposed of in the light of the same directions issued in the case of Govind Dan Charan (supra).

¶23

None is there to oppose the petition.

¶24

The controversy involved in this petition has already been set at rest by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Govind Dan Charan (supra) with the following directions:

¶25

“In view of the above, it is apparent that the issue pertaining to entitlement of the appellants to the third selection grade in the pay-scale of Rs.1640-2900 (5500-9000) already stands determined in the case of Karan Singh (supra), Chandra Shekhar (supra) and Vijay Pal Dabi (supra) and the contentions to the contrary by the State cannot be countenanced.

(3 of 3)

[2023/RJJP/011189]

[CW-6535/2010]

So far as the direction of the learned Single Judge in directing the appellants to pursue their notice for demand of justice is concerned, in view of the fact that the issue already stood settled by way of two Division Bench judgments and when a similarly situated petitioner had already been granted relief in the case of Laxmi Narayan Vyas (supra) decided by the learned Single Judge, there was apparently no reason for denying the similar relief to the appellants.

¶30

In view of the above discussion, the appeals filed by the appellants are allowed. The order dated 15.04.2014 passed by the learned Single Judge in all the writ petitions is set aside, the writ petitions filed by the petitioners-appellants are allowed to the extent that the appellants would be entitled to selection grade and get fixation in the pay-scale of Rs.975-1720,1200-2050 and 1640-2900 (55009000) on completion of 9, 18and 27 years of service respectively in terms of judgment in the case of Jagdish Narain Chaturvedi (supra) i.e. from the date of regular appointment.

¶31

The required exercise would be completed by the respondents within a period of three months from the date of this Judgment.”

¶32

Instant petition stands disposed of with same directions

¶33

issued in the case of Govind Dan Charan (supra).

¶34

Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.

¶35

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

¶36

KuD/38

Jagdish Prasad Narad v. the Director Medical Andhealthandors

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jagdish Prasad Narad v. the Director Medical Andhealthandors

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

Deoki Nandan Vs Judge Labour Court and Ors.

Amar Singh Meena S/O Sampat Lal Meena Vs the State of Rajasthan

State Vs Pragyag Bhadani

Hanuman Sahai Sharma Vs Director Gramin Vikas and Panchy

Nandkishore Meghvansi S/O Shri Jagdish Meghvansi Vs Manager Isuzu Garments

Giriraj Prasad Agarwal Vs State of Raj and Ors.