Disposed

Hanuman Mal Jat v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC22 Mar 2024CW/3146/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge Writ Petition regarding pension revision post-superannuation. The Court followed a binding Jaipur Bench judgment allowing notional increments. The petition is disposed of with liberty to file a representation for the department to decide within four weeks, subject to verification of averments.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of with liberty to file representation to competent authorities to decide within four weeks, upon verification of averments by respondents.

Hanuman Mal Jat Vs State of Rajasthan — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:14040]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3146/2024

¶4

Hanuman Mal Jat S/o Shri Durgaram Ji, Aged About 65 Years, R/ o Near Ramdev Ji Mandir, Tilak Nagar, Bikaner District Bikaner.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶8

Principal Secretary, Department Of Finance, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶9

Director, Directorate Of Pension And Pensioner's Welfare, Rajasthan, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur.

¶10

Commissioner, Land Settlement Department, Rajasthan Jaipur.

¶11

Land Settlement Officer, Bikaner.

¶12

Assistant Land Settlement Officer, Bikaner.

¶13

----Respondents

¶14

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ramdev Potalia For Respondent(s) :

¶15

JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

¶16

Order

¶17

22/03/2024

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has superannuated on 30^th June and 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 :-

(2 of 3)

[2024:RJ-JD:14040]

[CW-3146/2024]

“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 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

(3 of 3) [CW-3146/2024]

¶30

[2024:RJ-JD:14040]

¶31

The stay application also stands disposed of accordingly.

¶32

(DINESH MEHTA),J

¶33

22-raksha/-

Hanuman Mal Jat v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hanuman Mal Jat 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

Prince Kumar @ Kala Vs State of Rajasthan

Sushila Vs State of Rajasthan

Mahendra @ Shankar Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt. Chandra Kala Vs the State of Rajasthan

Aakash Dudi Vs State of Rajasthan

Manohar Lal Meghwal Vs State of Rajasthan