Allowed

Ramesh Chand Meena S/O Late Shri Nanag Ram Meena v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC7 Jan 2026CW/2751/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed clubbed writ petitions challenging denials of actual monetary benefits following earlier orders quashing illegal termination and suspension. The bench interpreted 'consequential benefits' to include actual payment of back wages, promotion, scales, and retirement benefits, directing respondent to accede to claims within six months.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders quashed; respondents directed to grant actual service benefits, promotions, scales, and monetary payments to petitioners within six months.

Ramesh Chand Meena S/O Late Shri Nanag Ram… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Rajasthan HC (2026)

¶1

[2026:RJ-JP:551]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2751/2022

¶4

Ramesh Chand Meena S/o Late Shri Nanag Ram Meena, Aged About 62 Years, R/o Purana Roopbas, Rajgarh Road, Alwar, Rajasthan.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary To The Government Of Rajasthan, Department Of Social Justice And Empowerment, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶8

The Commissioner (Ex-Officio Special Secretary To Government), Department Of Social Justice And Empowerment, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶9

The Director And Joint Administrative Secretary, Department Of Social Justice And Empowerment, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶10

The Additional Director (Vigilance And Administration), Department Of Social Justice And Empowerment, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶11

----Respondents

¶12

Connected With

¶13

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12931/2021

¶14

Smt Chandra Bala Arya W/o Shri Hanuman Prasad, Aged About 69 Years, Resident Of Choudhary Bhawan, Opposite Ladiya Medan, Nai Sarak, Kacheri Road, Alwar (Raj.)

¶15

----Petitioner

¶16

Versus

¶17

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary, Department Of Social Justice, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶18

The Director And Joint Secretary, Social Justice, Department Of Social Justice Government Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶19

The Assistant Director/ Social Welfare Officer, Department Of Social Justice Department, Alwar.

¶20

----Respondents

¶21

[2026:RJ-JP:551]	(2 of 8) [CW-2751/2022]
For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Akshit Gupta Mr. Ashwinee Kumar Jaiman
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Amitosh Pareek, Dy. GC with Mr. Manish Bhardwaj

¶22

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order

¶23

07/01/2026

¶24

Both these writ petitions were clubbed together as a common question of law is raised, therefore, we are disposing both the writ petitions with a common order. 2. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2751/2022 filed with following prayer:-

¶25

i) that the impugned order dated 24.02.2020 (Annexure-1) stating that the salary allowances to humble petitioner for the period of suspension from 06.11.1996 to 22.02.2011 & the period of termination from 23.02.2011 to 11.02.2019 shall be paid notional and impugned consequential order dated 20.03.2020 (Annexure-2) for refund of Rs. 12,28,351 to state authorities, may kindly be declared illegal and arbitrary and therefore, same may kindly be quashed and set aside;

¶26

ii) impugned order dated 15.09.2021 (Annexure -3) not granting promotion to humble petitioner on the post of Assistant Administrative Officer with effect from 01.04.2020, may kindly be declared illegal and arbitrary and therefore, same may kindly be quashed and set aside;

¶27

iii) by issuing appropriate writ or direction in the nature thereof the respondents may kindly be directed to:

¶28

(a) grant all consequential benefits to humble petitioner including actual back wages annual increments, revision of pay scales and

(3 of 8)

[2026:RJ-JP:551]

[CW-2751/2022]

selection scales as also other retiral benefits such as pension, gratuity and leave encashment at par with those employees who were in the service of the respondent authorities during the period of suspension of humble petitioner from 06.11.1996 to 22.02.2011 and the period of termination from 23.02.2011 to 11.02.2019;

¶33

(b) grant interest @ 9% per annum be paid on the arrears computed as payable to the humble petitioner effective the date of the order dated 16.11.2018 by this Hon'ble Court till date of payment.

¶34

3. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.12931/2021 filed with following prayer:-

¶35

(1) By an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction impugned orders dated 9.7.2020 and 21.12.2020 be declared bad and illegal to the extent it denies salary to the petitioner from 23.2.2011 to 30.11.2012 and same may be quashed and set aside and respondents be directed to pay salary to the petitioner for the aforesaid period with interest at the rate 9%@ per annum.

¶36

(2) By an appropriate writ, order or direction the respondents be directed to implement the order dated 21.8.2019 passed by the Hon'ble Court in S.B.C.W.P. 13888/2011 in letter and spirit. (3) By an appropriate writ, Order or Direction the action of the respondent not to pay the salary to the petitioner on account on no work no pay be declared bad and illegal and respondents be directed to pay the salary to the petitioner from 23.2.2011 till 30.11.2012.

¶37

Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that petitioner Ramesh Chand Meena was terminated on 20.07.2011 pursuant to

[2026:RJ-JP:551]

[CW-2751/2022]

(4 of 8)

a departmental enquiry, but termination order dated 20.07.2011 and 23.02.2011 were already quashed and set aside by judgment dated 16.11.2018 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11284/2011. 5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of Smt. Chandra Bala Arya has submitted that her termination order dated 23.02.2011 was set aside by a Coordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court on 21.08.2019 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.13888/2011. 6. Learned counsels have further submitted that the writ petitions were allowed with all consequential benefits. They further submitted that all consequential benefits means actual payment of all benefits, for which they are entitled but the respondents have only extended notional benefits. They also submitted that the petitioners are entitled for continuation of service till attaining the age of superannuation along with right to be considered for promotion, if a person just below them is considered for promotion.

¶42

Learned counsel for the parties have placed reliance upon judgment in case of Arun Prakash Sahal Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. reported as 2016 (2) RLW 1332: 2016 (3) WLC (Raj.) 216: RCR (Civil) 733 and submitted that term consequential benefits has been interpreted by this Hon'ble Court and it means that benefits for which an employee was entitled during his service period. They also submitted that the petitioners are entitled for actual benefits, but the respondents have not given actual benefits to the petitioners, therefore, they have been forced to file these writ petitions.

¶43

Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents and submitted that petitioners

[2026:RJ-JP:551]

[CW-2751/2022]

(5 of 8)

have approached this Hon'ble Court by filing a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and same is not maintainable as alternative and efficacious remedy under the Civil Services Appellate Tribunal Act, 1976 is provided. He further submitted that as per the order passed by this Hon'ble Court, the benefits were granted to the petitioners and petitioners are not entitled for any further benefits from the respondents. He also submitted that if there is any dispute about the facts then the petitioners are free to approach the Tribunal for computation and calculation. He further placed reliance upon order dated 05.05.2014 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.165/2014 titled as State of Rajasthan & Ors. Vs. Kishan Lal and submitted that the consequential benefits means notional benefits as the petitioners have not actually work on said posts, therefore, actual financial benefits cannot be granted to them.

¶48

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material placed on record. The only issue before this Court is interpretation of term "consequential benfits". 9. In Civil Writ Petition No.2751/2022, the facts indicate that the petitioner Ramesh Chand Meena has filed a Writ Petition No.11284/2011, which was allowed by this Court on 16.11.20018 and impugned orders dated 23.02.2011 and 20.07.2011 were quashed and set aside with all consequential benefits. 10. In Civil Writ Petition No.12931/2021, petitioner Smt. Chandra Bala Arya has filed a Writ Petition No.13888/2011 and same was allowed on 21.08.2019. The impugned orders dated 23.02.2011 and 20.07.2011 stands quashed and set aside with consequential benefits.

[2026:RJ-JP:551]

[CW-2751/2022]

(6 of 8)

In case of Arun Prakash Sahal Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (supra) , a Coordinate Bench at Principal Seat, Jodhpur has considered judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Deepali Gundu Surwase Vs. Kranti Junior Adhyapak Mahavidyalaya (D. ED.) reported as AIR 2014 SC (Supply) 121 and Division Bench judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in case of Mahesh Prasad Dwivedi Vs. District Cooperative Central

¶53

Bank Ltd. and held that the petitioner is entitled to full back wages as the Court has directed that petitioner shall be entitled for all consequential benefits. The respondents are directed to extend actual service benefits including salary and others admissible emoluments to the petitioner for the period during which he was kept out of service under the effect of illegal order of compulsory retirement.

¶54

In case of State of Rajasthan & Ors. Vs. Kishan Lal (supra) , a Coordinate Bench considering an order dated 23.01.2013 passed by Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal has observed that consequential benefits would mean only notional benefits and not the monetary. In case of State of Rajasthan & Ors. Vs. Kishan Lal (supra), the term consequential benefits was neither examined nor explained.

¶55

In case of K. Sambha Murty Vs. Sanjeev Chaddha & Ors. reported as 2025 INSC 110 , the phrase "consequential benefits" was examined. The appeal of the employee was allowed and Hon'ble Supreme Court has emphasized that once disciplinary proceedings are set aside, the person is entitled to have its promotion restored from effective date with all monetary benefits. The employee is entitled to receive all the fruits of the victory

[2026:RJ-JP:551]

[CW-2751/2022]

(7 of 8)

specifically a retroactive promotion, which was withheld because of the departmental proceedings.

¶60

In both the writ petitions decided in favour of the petitioners Ramesh Chand Meena and Smt. Chandra Bala Arya, a Coordinate Bench of this Court has granted consequential benefits. The terms consequential benefits refers to the full range of monetary and non-monetary entitlement flows from a decision, which includes reinstatement, promotion, grant of scale and actual payment of monetary benefits.

¶61

The dictionary meaning of consequential is "happening as a direct result of a particular situation or event". The consequential benefits means monetary or secondary entitlement that flows directly from a primary order such as backwages/salary, arrears, fixation of seniority, retiral benefits, promotion or increment and further grant of scale etc. After quashing of the termination orders, the petitioners are entitled for all such benefits which would otherwise be available to them, if no such order is passed and they are serving regularly with the respondents.

¶62

The respondents have denied actual benefits to the petitioner Ramesh Chand Meena despite decision dated 16.11.2018 and to Smt. Chandra Bala Arya despite decision dated 21.08.2019. The respondents have interpreted the term "consequential benefits" as only notional benefits. Thus, the interpretation is contrary to law and the petitioners are entitled for quashing of all the orders, as challenged by them.

¶63

In view of the discussion made herein above, the writ petitions are hereby allowed:-

(8 of 8)

[2026:RJ-JP:551]

[CW-2751/2022]

(i) The order dated 24.02.2020 (Annexure-1), 20.03.2020 (Annexure-2) dated 15.09.2021 (Annexure-3) in Writ Petition No.2751/2022 are hereby quashed and set aside;

¶68

(ii) The order dated 09.07.2020 (Annexure-2) and 21.12.2020 (Annexure-3) in Writ Petition No.12931/2021 are quashed and set aside.

¶69

The respondents are directed to grant all actual service benefits to the petitioners considering that the order affecting their service conditions was never passed. The petitioners are entitled for promotion, if they fall within range of consideration if DPC was convened during such period. In case of entitlement, the promotion shall be granted from the date when their immediate junior was considered and granted promotion by the respondents. The petitioners are also entitled for grant of scale, if any. After considering promotion and other benefits to the petitioners, the petitioners are also entitled for re-computation and calculation of their retiral benefits.

¶70

The entire exercise has to be completed by respondents within a period of six months from date of receipt of copy of the order and actual monetary benefits be paid to them accordingly. 20. The writ petitions stands disposed with pending applications, if any.

¶71

(ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J

¶72

GAURAV /32-33

Ramesh Chand Meena S/O Late Shri Nanag Ram Meena v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh Chand Meena S/O Late Shri Nanag Ram Meena v. the 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

Rakesh Kumar Bakoliya S/O Sh. Shimbhu Dayal Bakoliya Vs State of Rajasthan

Varis Khan S/O Shri Ameen Khan Vs State of Rajasthan

Satyanarayan S/O Kailash Vs the State of Rajasthan

Arvind Parashar Son of Shri Udai Chand Vs State of Rajasthan through Its Principal Secretary

Rameez Raja S/O Shri Abdul Waheed Vs the State of Rajasthan

Ibra @ Ibran Son of Mamrej Vs State of Rajasthan