Dismissed

Naveen Kumar v. State and Ors.

Rajasthan HC25 Jan 2024CW/6617/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Single Bench disposed of a writ petition concerning appointment and inter-district transfer benefits for Prabodhaks. Relying on a coordinate bench decision (Amar Singh case), the Court held that notional benefits had already been granted, preventing re-adjudication.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed as the controversy is resolved by the coordinate bench order granting notional benefits.

Naveen Kumar Vs State and Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:4171]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6617/2018

Naveen Kumar

----Petitioner

Versus

State And Ors

		----Respondent
For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. D.S. Sodha
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. K.K. Bissa,AGC

¶9

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

¶10

Order

¶11

25/01/2024

¶12

Learned counsel for the parties jointly submits that the controversy raised in the instant writ petition stands resolved in view of the adjudication made by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Amar Singh & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan &

¶13

Ors.: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5518/2018, holding thus:

¶14

“This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners seeking a direction to the respondents to consider the petitioners to be appointed on the post of Prabodhak w.e.f. 29.09.2008 i.e. from the date the persons lower in the merit to the petitioners, were accorded appointment.

¶15

Further submissions have been made that the respondents be directed to accept the applications of the petitioners for inter district transfer taking into consideration their date of appointment as prior to 31.12.2008.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioners made submissions that during pendency of the present writ petition, by passing orders dated 13.02.2019 (Annex.R/1 & R/2), the relief insofar as grant of notional benefits to the petitioners is concerned, the same has been granted.

(2 of 2)

[2024:RJ-JD:4171]

[CW-6617/2018]

It is prayed that the respondents be directed to now take into consideration the fact that the petitioners were appointed prior to 31.12.2008 as Prabodhak for the purpose of their inter district transfer as and when the respondents undertake the exercise/permit such transfers.

¶21

Counsel for the respondents has no objection to the said submission made by the counsel for the petitioners.

¶22

In view of submissions made, the writ petition filed by the petitioners is disposed of. As the petitioners have already been accorded notional benefit regarding their seniority/date of appointment as Prabodhak, the respondents are directed to take the said date into consideration for the purpose of inter district transfer, as and when such exercise is undertaken by the respondents.”

¶23

Accordingly, this writ petition is also disposed of in the light of the decision rendered vide order dated 23.08.2022 passed in

¶24

Amar Singh's case (supra) in the same terms. All pending applications also stand disposed of.

¶25

(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.

¶26

259-Zeeshan

Naveen Kumar v. State and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naveen Kumar v. State and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jasveer Meena Vs the Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited

Amar Jeet Vs State of Rajasthan

Chunni Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Dr. Amit Parmar Vs State of Rajasthan

Rajbala Vs State of Rajasthan

Kailash Ram Baswana Vs State of Rajasthan