Disposed

Motiram Choudhary v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC23 Feb 2024CW/2541/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition seeking reliefs related to pension increments for retired forest department employees was disposed of. The High Court allowed the petitioner liberty to file a representation to competent authorities for decision within four weeks, relying on a binding Supreme Court judgment.

What did the court decide?

liberty to file representation to competent authorities; authorities directed to decide within four weeks.

Motiram Choudhary Vs State of Rajasthan — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:9420]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2541/2024

¶4

Motiram Choudhary S/o Shri Indraram, Aged About 63 Years, R/ o Mukam Post Khariya Tala, Barmer, Rajasthan.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

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

¶8

The Chief Conservator Of Forest (Hoff), Rajasthan, Jaipur. 3. The Deputy Conservator Of Forest, Forests And Environment, Barmer, Rajasthan.

¶9

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

¶10

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

¶11

----Respondents

¶12

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vinay Baghmar

¶13

JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

¶14

Order

¶15

23/02/2024

¶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 a batch of writ petitions led by S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.21/2020 (Vijay Singh vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.) . The operative part of the said order is reproduced as under:-

¶17

“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 on1st July on account of their conduct for the requisite length of time i.e. one year. The petitioners would be entitled to get notional payment on 1st July, notwithstanding their superannuation on 30th June.

(2 of 2)

[2024:RJ-JD:9420]

[CW-2541/2024]

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.

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed 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).

¶26

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.

¶27

Stay application also stands disposed of, accordingly.

¶28

(DINESH MEHTA),J

¶29

18-Mak/-

Motiram Choudhary v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Motiram 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vishna Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Seema Jain Vs State of Rajasthan

Lalit Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan

Virendra Tank Vs the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation

Suresh Kumar Saini Vs the State of Rajasthan

Sunil Kumar Bishnoi (Belt No. 315) Vs State of Rajasthan