Dismissed

Mool Chand Sharma v. State of Raj and Ors.

Rajasthan HC9 Jan 2026CW/244/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought fixation of minimum pay scale and interest for a delayed period despite a prior upheld order allegedly satisfied by payment. Contenders opposed, claiming satisfaction. Court dismissed petition finding no case for interference.

What did the court decide?

None; petition dismissed due to alleged compliance with previous order and lack of justification for further interference.

Mool Chand Sharma Vs State of Raj and Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2026)

¶1

[2026:RJ-JP:791]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 244/2009

¶4

Mool Chand Sharma Son Of Shri Suraj Mal Sharma, aged about 46 years, At Present Resident Of Bapu Nagar, Balita Road (Kunhadi), Kota Rajasthan

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary To The Government, Public Health Engineering Department, Secretariat, Jaipur

¶8

The Chief Engineer (Rural), Public Health Engineering Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶9

The Executive Engineer, Public Health Engineering Department, Revenue And Drainage Circle, Jaipur (Rajasthan)

¶10

The Asstt. Ex. Engineer, Public Health Engineering Department, Revenue Sub Division-II, Vigyan Nagar, Kota (Rajasthan).

¶11

----Respondents

¶12

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Nadeem Mazahir, Adv. with Mr. C. P. Saini, Adv. for Mr. Hitesh Bagri, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Gunjan Chawla, Adv. for Mr. Neeraj Batra, GC

¶13

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA

¶14

Judgment

¶15

09/01/2026

¶16

The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for seeking a direction against the respondents to grant benefit of fixation of pay in the minimum of pay scale of the post of LDC to the petitioner along with all admissible allowances due from 17.05.1984 to 31.03.1987 as well as to pay interest for the period from the year 1998 to 27.04.2007.

[2026:RJ-JP:791]

[CW-244/2009]

(2 of 3)

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that earlier for claiming benefits of minimum pay scale of LDC, writ petition was filed by the petitioner which was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 30.10.1998 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1037/1993 directing the respondents to pay the minimum of pay scale of the post of LDC to the petitioner along with all admissible allowances from the date he was performing the duties of post of LDC.

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that since, the aforesaid order dated 30.10.1998 passed by this Court in earlier writ petition of the petitioner was not complied with, under constraining circumstances, he filed contempt petition and thereafter, payment of Rs.51,396/- was made to him and upon making of such payment the contempt petition was also disposed of.

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that later on the petitioner realized that he has not been paid the benefits for the period from 17.05.1984 to 31.03.1987 and the benefit of interest, therefore, the instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for claiming such benefits.

¶23

Per contra , learned counsel for the respondents opposed the writ petition and submitted that the order dated 30.10.1998 passed by this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1037/1993 has been complied with by the respondents in it is letter and spirit and thereafter, the petitioner himself has given one letter (Annexure-R/3) expressing his satisfaction with regard to payment and it has been mentioned that after receiving the cheque of Rs.51,396/-, no dispute with regard to payment is due.

¶24

[2026:RJ-JP:791]

¶25

[CW-244/2009]

¶26

No rejoinder to the aforesaid factual aspect and issuance of letter (Annexure-R/3) has been filed by the petitioner. 7. In the light of above, there is no case of interference by this Court in exercising of powers under Article 226 of Constitution of India, hence, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is hereby dismissed.

¶27

(ANAND SHARMA),J

¶28

Jatin /25

Mool Chand Sharma v. State of Raj and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mool Chand Sharma v. State of Raj and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hotel Corporation Rajasthan Th Vs Rameshwar Lal and Ors.

Sh Manohar Lal Kukad Vs State of Raj and Anr.

Gangaram Vs the Judge Labour Court Bharatp

Smt Vinod Vs State of Raj and Ors.

The Jaigarh Publice Charitable Vs the Prescribed Authority Appoi

Lalit Prasad Joshi and Ors. Vs R S R T C and Ors.