Disposed

Mohabat Singh v. Raj. State Road Transport Cor.

Rajasthan HC24 Apr 2024CW/4581/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order relies on prior judgments regarding second selection scale deferment. It directs the respondents to decide on a specific representation filed by the petitioner within four weeks, applying previous court rulings. The related stay petition is also disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent to decide petitioner's representation within four weeks.

Mohabat Singh Vs Raj. State Road Transport… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:18006]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4581/2021

¶4

Mohabat Singh S/o Dhan Singh Bhati, Aged About 57 Years, R/o Bhatiyo Ka Khada, Chittorgarh, Rajasthan.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

Raj. State Road Transport Cor., Jaipur Through Its Managing Director.

¶8

The Regional Manager, Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Udaipur.

¶9

The Chief Manager, Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Chittorgarh Depot, Chittorgarh.

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bhavit Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sunil Purohit

¶12

JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

¶13

Order

¶14

24/04/2024

¶15

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the controversy involved in the present case is squarely covered by a judgment of this Court rendered in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8810/2014 “Tara Chand Vs. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation & Anr. ” decided on 25.01.2017 in the following terms:-

¶17

“Apparently, by effect of the above circular, benefit of second selection scale falling due to the petitioner could only have been deferred by two years and not more. In this background, the decision of the respondent Corporation to defer second selection scale admissible to the petitioner from 6.10.2008 to 6.10.2019 is totally unjustified,

(2 of 3)

[2024:RJ-JD:18006]

[CW-4581/2021]

arbitrary and contrary to the circulars adopted by the Corporation.

¶22

The impugned action of the respondents is thus quashed and struck down. The respondents shall extend the benefit of second selection scale to the petitioner by making a deferment of two years from the date of his actual entitlement. Monetary benefits flowing from the above direction shall be paid to the petitioner within a period of six months from today with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of accrual till the date of actual payment. In case, the payment is delayed beyond three months, the interest shall stand enhanced to 9% per annum and shall be recoverable from the official/s responsible for causing the delay if any.

¶23

The writ petition is allowed in these terms.

¶24

No order as to costs.”

¶25

Learned counsel further submits that the order dated 25.01.2017 was affirmed by the Division Bench in D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No.524/2018 decided on 02.12.2021. Against the order dated 02.12.2021 passed by the Division Bench of this Court, a Special Leave Petition No.10330/2022 was preferred before Hon’ble The Supreme Court and the same was also dismissed vide judgment dated 13.07.2022.

¶26

In this view of the matter, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner may be permitted to file a representation before the respondents, who shall consider the same in light of the judgment rendered by this Court in the case of Tara Chand (supra).

¶27

In view of the limited prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction that in the event of filing a representation by the

(3 of 3)

[2024:RJ-JD:18006]

[CW-4581/2021]

petitioner, the respondent shall decide the same within a period of four weeks from the date of its receipt, keeping in mind the law laid down by this Court in the case of Tara Chand (supra).

¶32

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.

¶33

The stay petition also stands disposed of accordingly.

¶34

(DINESH MEHTA),J

¶35

162-Arvind/-

Mohabat Singh v. Raj. State Road Transport Cor.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohabat Singh v. Raj. State Road Transport Cor.

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

Buddha Ram Choudhary Vs Union of India

Surendra Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Krishan Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan

Yakub Ali Vs State of Rajasthan

Tag Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Vidhya Tiwari Vs State of Rajasthan