Disposed

Loon Karan Jangid v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC12 Feb 2024CW/1001/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a civil writ petition, Justice Dinesh Mehta disposed of the petition allowing the petitioner liberty to file a detailed representation regarding post-superannuation increment benefits. The authorities were directed to decide the representation within four weeks, keeping in mind the law laid down in Vijay Singh vs. State of Rajasthan.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to file a detailed representation; authorities directed to decide the same within four weeks.

Loon Karan Jangid Vs the State of Rajasthan — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:7129]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1001/2024

¶4

Loon Karan Jangid S/o Shri Binja Ram, Aged About 72 Years, R/o Rai Colony Road, Vishwakarna Circle, District Barmer, Rajasthan.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Forests And Environment, Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶8

The Principal Chief Conservator Of Forests (Hoff), Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶9

The Deputy Conservator Of Forest, Forests And Environment, Barmer, Rajasthan.

¶10

The Assistant Director, Pension And Pensioners Welfare Department, Jodhpur, Rajasthan.

¶11

The District Treasury Officer, Pension And Pensioners Welfare Department, Barmer, Rajasthan.

¶12

----Respondents

¶13

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vinay Bagmar

¶14

JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA Order

¶15

12/02/2024

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the controversy involved in the present case is squarely covered by a judgment dated 21.07.2023 of this Court at Jaipur Bench rendered in batch of writ petition led by S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.21/2020 (Vijay Singh vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.) . The

¶17

operative part of the said order is reproduced as under :-

¶18

“41. Hence, looking to the binding effect of above judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of C.P. Mundinamani(supra) and All India Judges Association (supra) , it is held that the petitioners would be entitled to get the benefits of increment falling due on 1st July on account of their conduct for the requisite length of time i.e. one year. The petitioners would be entitled to get

(2 of 2)

[2024:RJ-JD:7129]

[CW-1001/2024]

notional payment on 1st July, notwithstanding their superannuation on 30th June.

¶23

The respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioners afresh in the light of the observations made hereinabove and thereafter grant notional increment to the petitioners. The petitioners’ pension would consequently be refixed. The appropriate orders be issued and the arrears of pension be paid to the petitioners within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶24

With the aforesaid directions, all these petitions stand disposed of.

¶25

Stay applications and all applications (pending, if any) also stand disposed of”.

¶26

Learned counsel, therefore, prays that the petitioner may be permitted to file a detailed representation before the competent authorities for redressal of his grievance.

¶27

In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file a representation to the competent authorities of the department and the competent authorities of the department are directed to decide the same within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of such representation, keeping in mind the law laid down by this Court in the case of Vijay Singh (supra).

¶28

The order has been passed based on the submissions made in the petition, the respondents would be free to examine the veracity of the submissions made in the petition and only in case, the averments made therein are found to be correct, the petitioner would be entitled to the relief.

¶29

Stay petition is also disposed of accordingly.

¶30

(DINESH MEHTA),J

¶31

17-raksha/-

Loon Karan Jangid v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Loon Karan Jangid 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rakesh Kumar Pachar Vs Punjab National Bank

Ramjaan Khan Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramesh Kumar Vs the Jodhpur Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Limited

Aabahas Acharya Vs Sushil Kumar Jain

Shri Karamveer Vs State of Rajasthan

Rai Singh Vs State of Rajasthan