Vishnu Kumar Sharma S/O Late Shri Suresh Chand Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan

¶1

[2026:RJ-JP:18624]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Review Petition (Writ) No.140/2025

¶4

In

¶5

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5212/2020

¶6

Vishnu Kumar Sharma S/o Late Shri Suresh Chand Sharma, Aged About 35 Years, Resident Of 55, Shiksha Sagar E-Block, Govindpura, Sanganer.

¶7

Madan Lal Saini S/o Late Shri Nathu Ram Saini, Aged About 45 Years, Resident Of G-220, Bhawani Nagar, Murlipura, Jaipur.

¶8

Vikas Vashisht S/o Late Shri Prem Prakash, Aged About 36 Years, Resident Of F.n. G-2, P.n. 86, Nalanda Vihar, Maharani Farm, Durgapura, Jaipur

¶9

Goverdhan Lal Meena S/o Late Shri Nangram Meena, Aged About 40 Years, Resident Of Badagaon, Bhatia, Tehsil Amer, Jaipur.

¶10

Naurat Mal Meena, S/o Late Shri Shaitan Meena, Aged About 41 Years, Resident Of Village Kapdiyas Kalan, Post Gadota, Bagru, Jaipur.

¶11

Vishal Sharma S/o Late Shri Goverdhan Lal Sharma, Aged About 46 Years, Resident Of Outside Ravan Gate, Subhash Circle, Chomu, Jaipur.

¶12

Deepak Kumar S/o Late Shri Rochi Ram, Aged About 45 Years, Resident Of 3/389, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur.

¶13

Pawan Kumar Pareek S/o Ramprasad Pareek, Aged About 35 Years, Resident Of F.no. P-2, Nalanda Vihar, Maharani Farm, Durgapura, Jaipur.

¶14

Kailash Chandra Yadav S/o Late Shri Shankar Lal Yadav, Aged About 37 Years, Resident Of Yadavo Ka Mohalla, Ward No. 14, Chomu.

¶15

Amit Kumar Yogi S/o Late Shri Ram Swaroop Yogi, Aged About 36 Years, Resident Of Village Post Beelpur, Tehsil Amer, Jaipur.

¶16

Dheerendra Singh Chauhan S/o Late Shri Rajendra Singh Chauhan, Aged About 33 Years, Resident Of Plot No. 42, Shree Ganesh Colony, Bas Badanpura, Jaipur.

¶17

Nawal Kishor Sharma S/o Late Shri Jagdish Prasad

¶18

(2 of 6) [WRW-140/2025]

¶19

[2026:RJ-JP:18624]

¶20

Sharma, Aged About 39 Years, Resident Of Plot No. 65, Rani Colony, Niwaru Road, Jhotwara, Jaipur

¶21

Naresh Kumar Meena S/o Late Shri R.p. Meena, Aged About 45 Years, Resident Of 2, Keshay Vihar Extension, Gopalpura Bypass, Jaipur.

¶22

Kamal Singh S/o Late Shri Roop Narayan, Aged About 43 Years, Resident Of Prathik Vihar Colony, Behind Hotel Mid Way, Dausa (Raj.).

¶23

----Review Respondents/Petitioners

¶24

Versus

¶25

State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary, Department Of Energy, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶26

State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary, Department Of Finance, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶27

Jaipur Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Limited, Through Its Managing Director, Vidyut Bhawan, Janpath, Jaipur

¶28

Accounts Officer (Rules), Jaipur Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Limited, Vidyut Bhawan, Janpath, Jaipur.

¶29

----Review Petitioners/Respondents

¶30

For Review	: Mr. Sarvesh Jain with
Petitioner(s)	Ms. Sakshi Sharma
For Review	: Mr. Punit Singhvi with
Respondent(s)	Mr. Ayush Singh and Mr. Vaibhav Dhaddha

¶31

JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

¶32

Order

¶33

01/05/2026

¶34

By way of filing the instant review petition, a prayer has been made by the review-petitioners/respondents (hereinafter “review petitioners”) to recall/review the order dated 24.10.2024, passed by this Court while deciding S.B. Civil Writ Petition

[2026:RJ-JP:18624]

[WRW-140/2025]

(3 of 6)

No.5212/2020, submitted by the review-respondents/petitioners (hereinafter “review-respondents”).

¶39

Learned counsel for the review-petitioners submits that the writ petition submitted by the review-respondents was disposed of vide order dated 24.10.2024 in light of the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Rajasthan Vidyut

¶40

Takniki Karamchari Association vs. State of Rajasthan and

¶41

Ors. while deciding D.B. Civil Writ Petiton No.880/2017 on 12.05.2017. 3. Counsel submits that at the time of passing of the impugned order dated 24.10.2024, the review-petitioners could not bring into the notice of this Court, the fact that the aforesaid order dated 12.05.2017 passed by the Division Bench in the case of

¶42

Rajasthan Vidyut Takniki Karamchari Association (supra) was assailed by the respondents therein, i.e. Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd, before the Hon’ble Supreme Court by way of filing Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 3424/2018 and the said SLP was disposed of by the Hon’ble Apex Court vide order dated 29.01.2018, whereby liberty was granted to the petitioner-Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. to file a review petition before the Division Bench of this Court. The aforesaid order was passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court on 29.01.2018.

¶43

Counsel submits that pursuant to the aforesaid order dated 29.01.2018 passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court, a D.B. Writ Review Petition No.42/2018 was submitted by the petitioner-Rajasthan Vidhyut Takniki Karamchari Association before the Division Bench of this Court and the same was disposed of by the Division Bench vide order dated 25.04.2018, whereby directions were issued to

[2026:RJ-JP:18624]

[WRW-140/2025]

(4 of 6)

the petitioner-Rajasthan Vidhyut Takniki Karamchari Association to allow the benefit of grade pay corresponding to the promotional post, in addition to the pay in running pay band. He further submits that it was also observed by the Division Bench that if the members of the Union had not been given the benefit of grade pay of the promotional post, then the same should be given within a period three months from the date of receipt of copy of the order dated 25.04.2018. Counsel submits that in the instant case also, the benefit of grade pay of promotional post has already been given to the review-respondents way back in the year 2017. Hence, under these circumstances, the order dated 25.04.2018, passed by the Division Bench of this Court in D.B. Writ Review Petition No.42/2018, would be applicable to the instant case. The original order dated 12.05.2017, passed by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Rajasthan Vidyut Takniki Karamchari Association (supra) is not applicable in the present case. Hence, the instant review petition is liable to be allowed. 5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the review-respondents opposes the arguments raised by counsel for the review-petitioners and submits that the order dated 12.05.2017 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Rajasthan Vidyut Takniki Karamchari Association (supra) has not been reviewed by the Division Bench in D.B. Writ Review Petition No.42/2018. The order was confined and limited. It was observed by the Division Bench that in case, grade pay corresponding to the promotional post has been given, then there would remain no issue for review, and in case it is otherwise, the direction was to allow the grade pay corresponding to the

[2026:RJ-JP:18624]

[WRW-140/2025]

(5 of 6)

promotional post in addition to the pay running band. In the instant case also, the minimum pay band the promotional post of UDC has not been granted to the review-respondents in light of the order passed by the Division Bench in Rajasthan Vidyut Takniki Karamchari Association (supra). Counsel submits that the aforesaid order passed by the Division Bench in Rajasthan Vidyut Takniki Karamchari Association (supra) has not been reviewed in toto, rather the order dated 25.04.2018, passed by the Division Bench of this Court in D.B. Writ Review Petition No.42/2018 was passed in part only. Hence, under these circumstances, no case is made out for recall of the order dated 24.10.2024 and the review petition submitted by the reviewpetitioners is liable to be rejected.

¶52

Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on the record. 7. Perusal of the record indicates that the S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5212/2020, submitted by the review-respondents was disposed of vide order dated 24.10.2024, on the basis of a joint submission made by counsels appearing on behalf of the parties that the controversy involved in the aforesaid writ petition submitted by the review-respondents has already been decided by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Rajasthan Vidyut Takniki Karamchari Association (supra) vide order dated 12.05.2017.

¶53

Considering the aforesaid joint submission made by counsels appearing on behalf of both the sides, the order dated 24.10.2024 was passed.

[2026:RJ-JP:18624]

[WRW-140/2025]

(6 of 6)

Now, by way of filing the instant review petition, the reviewpetitioners have made a prayer before this Court to rewrite the order of the disposed off S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5212/2020, in the light of the order dated 25.04.2018, passed by the Division Bench at a subsequent stage in D.B. Writ Review Petition No.42/2018.

¶58

This Court is not convinced by the arguments made by counsel for the review-petitioners as no justification has been provided by them to show why these facts were not brought into the notice of this Court when arguments were heard while deciding the S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5212/2020.

¶59

This Court finds no valid reason to review or recall of the order dated 24.10.2024.

¶60

Accordingly, the instant review petition stands dismissed. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

¶61

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

¶62

KuD/55

Vishnu Kumar Sharma S/O Late Shri Suresh Chand Sharma v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishnu Kumar Sharma S/O Late Shri Suresh Chand Sharma v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Manju Choudhary D/O Mr. Lila Ram Choudhary W/O Shri Vikas Jat Vs State of Rajasthan

Mahendra Gurjar S/O Sh. Prem Singh Gurjar, Vs State of Rajasthan

Kashif Zuberi S/O Shri Saleem Zuberi, Vs State of Rajasthan

Suraj Mal Son of Shri Kishan Lal Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan

Badrilal Sharma S/O Shri Jamunashankar Ji Sharma, Vs State of Rajasthan

Pawan Bhat S/O Shri Jitendra Bhat Vs State of Rajasthan