Allowed

Khinya Ram v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC8 Feb 2024CW/327/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition by Khinya Ram concerning denial of pay fixation, notional benefits, and seniority for an LDC post was allowed. The Single Bench relied on a Division Bench judgment that permitted the government to address representations from similarly situated petitioners while keeping in mind departmental stands in similar cases.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is allowed; the Government is permitted to accept representations within one month to resolve grievances.

Khinya Ram Vs State of Rajasthan — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 327/2019

¶3

Khinya Ram S/o Shri Simantha Ram, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Sahid Gopal Nagar, Gram Panchayat Sadri, Tehsil Lohawat, District Jodhpur, Rajasthan.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department Of Rural And Panchayati Raj, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶7

The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Dholpur, District Dholpur, Rajasthan.

¶8

The Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Rajakheda, District Dholpur, Rajasthan.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anil Bishnoi. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sunil Beniwal, AAG with Mr. Kunal Upadhyay.

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA

¶12

Order

¶13

08/02/2024

¶14

Grievance of the petitioner herein arises out of denial pay fixation, notional benefits and seniority to him with all consequential benefits on the post of LDC.

¶15

Instant writ petition was earlier allowed ex parte vide an order dated 08.01.2019 passed by Coordinate Bench of this Court presided over by my learned brother Arun Bhansali, J.

¶16

However, in a DB appeal preferred by the State bearing DB Special Appeal (Writ) No. 234/2021, the ex parte order was set aside and the matter was remanded for reconsideration by the Single Bench.

¶17

(2 of 3) [CW-327/2019]

¶18

When taken up for hearing, today learned counsel for the respondents fairly points out that the aforesaid ex parte judgment dated 08.01.2019 was in turn based upon another Single Bench judgment of this Court rendered in Om Prakash & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.21214/2017, decided on 21.11.2017. An intra Court appeal being DBSAW No.23/2021 (State of Rajasthan & Ors. v. Sadhana) was also filed against the judgment in Om Prakaksh (supra), which was dismissed in following terms:-

¶19

“Learned counsel has submitted that the learned Single Judge at Jaipur Bench vide order dated 21.11.2017 passed in S.B.Civil Writ Petition No. 21214/2017 (Om Prakash & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.) has granted reliefs to the similarly situated petitioners in the light of judgment passed in Hemlata Shrimali & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (SBCWP No.3247/2015, decided on 1.4.2015 and relying upon the case of Suman Bai & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors., reported in 2009 (1) (WLC) (Raj.) 381. It is further submitted that the Special Appeal Writ challenging the order passed in Om Prakash Sharma’s case(supra) has already been disposed of by a Division Bench of this Court.

¶20

It is noticed that the Special Appeal Writ preferred against the order passed in Om Prakash Sharma’s case (supra) has been disposed of by a Division Bench of this Court while passing the following order:-

¶21

“Learned counsel for the petitioners, however, submitted that the issue is arising in large number of cases and in several departments, the Government has accepted the stand and granted the benefits. If the petitioners are not granted similar benefits, it would amount to discriminatory treatment. Whatever be the grievance of the petitioners they can be resolved at the level of the administration or by the Court through bipartite hearing.

¶22

In view of the peculiar circumstances, these appeals are disposed of by permitting the Government to take into account the representations already made or to be filed by any of the petitioners within one month. In the process, the authorities will bear in mind the stand taken by the department in

¶23

(3 of 3)

¶24

[CW-327/2019]

¶25

similar cases. Such representations would be decided in accordance with law unmindful of the observations and directions issued by the learned Single Judge in the impugned orders. Eventually, if the grievances of the petitioners still survive after the Government decision, it is open for the petitioners to seek redressal thereafter in accordance with law. The appeals are disposed of accordingly.”

¶26

In view of the above, this Special Appeal Writ is also disposed of on the same terms as quoted above.”

¶27

In view of the aforesaid DB judgment of this Court upholding the Single Bench judgment rendered in Om Prakash (supra), I see no reason why the benefit of the same be not accorded to the petitioner herein.

¶28

Accordingly, the present writ petition is also allowed in same terms as order and judgment passed in the case of writ petition filed by Ms. Sadhana read with the DB appeal order dated 09.10.2023, passed in DB Special Appeal No. 23/2021.

¶29

(ARUN MONGA),J

¶30

1-Sumit/-

Khinya Ram v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Khinya Ram 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

Ladu Ram Bishnoi Vs the State of Rajasthan

Shanti Lal Damor Vs the State of Rajasthan

Bhanu Priya Sunda Vs the State of Rajasthan

Chetna Sharma Vs the State of Rajasthan

Naushad Ali Saiyad Vs State of Rajasthan

Madan Lal Vs the State of Rajasthan