Supreme Court - Daily Orders
L.R. Bairwa vs The State Of Rajasthan And Ors. ... on 10 May, 2018
Bench: J. Chelameswar, Sanjay Kishan Kaul
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 2542 OF 2006
L.R. BAIRWA APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS. RESPONDENT(S)
O R D E R
Heard learned counsel for the parties. On 22.02.2018, we passed the following orders:-
“We have put to learned counsel for the State Government that the very object of introduction of Section 3 to Appendix IX is to give benefit of the prior period of employment both with State Governments/Government of India and autonomous institutions. Thus, a person who is recruited through a more transparent procedure of the examination after getting clearance from prior employer is 2 sought to be deprived of the benefit of the continuity of service while the person who may come on deputation and then absorbed (comparatively a less transparent method) gets the benefit. The other aspect which troubles us is that in one of the cases, the Signature Not Verified State Government have given the benefit to one Digitally signed by SWETA DHYANI Date: 2018.05.15 14:13:38 IST Reason: Radhey Shyam Gupta. In case of the second similar example given where the High |court opined in favour of the person i.e. Uday Singh Rawat, this court has today dismissed the 2 special leave petition filed by the State Government. Learned counsel for the respondent- State seeks some time to obtain instruction whether in the aforesaid circumstances, the benefit can also be extended to the appellant. List the matter on 27th March, 2018 a part heard.” The respondent – State Government has now filed an additional affidavit with reference to the aforesaid order and observe in paragraph 4 as under:-
“That in view of the fact that Uday Singh Udawat case has already been dismissed by this Hon’ble and considering the directions passed by this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 22.02.2018 and 27.03.2018, the Law and Legal Department of State of Rajasthan has apprised Ld. Counsel of State vide communication dated 12.04.2018 wherein decision is taken to approve the case of Shri L.R. Bhairwa (petitioner herein) in reference of calculating the service rendered with ‘Reserve Bank of India’ for the purpose of ‘pensionery benefit’ with a condition that he has to deposit the amount received from Indian Reserve Bank as ‘terminal benefit’ with the ‘State Exchequer’. A true translated copy of communication dated 12.04.2018 is marked herewith and annexed as [Annexrue A/3 page 8 to page 11].” The prayer thus made jointly by learned counsel for the parties is this that the present appeal may be disposed of in terms of what has been set out in paragraph 3 4 (mentioned above).
Ordered accordingly.
The appeal is, accordingly, stands disposed of.
..........................J. [J. CHELAMESWAR] ..........................J. [SANJAY KISHAN KAUL] NEW DELHI 10th May, 2018 4 ITEM NO.101 COURT NO.2 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No(s). 2542/2006 L.R. BAIRWA Appellant(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 10-05-2018 This appeal was called on for hearing today. CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J. CHELAMESWAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL For Appellant(s) Mr. C. S. N. Mohan Rao, AOR Mr. Lokesh Kumar Sharma, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Kuldeep S. Parihar, Adv.
Mr. H. S. Parihar, AOR Mr. S.S. Shamshery, Adv.
Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Sandeep Singh, Adv.
Mr. Ankit Raj, Adv.
Ms. Nidhi Jaiswal, Adv.
Ms. Indira Bhakar, Adv.
Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR Mr. Sunil Kumar Jain, AOR Mr. Punya Garg, Adv.
Mr. Abhishek Jain, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The appeal is disposed of in terms of the signed order. Pending applications, if any, are also stand disposed of.
(SWETA DHYANI) (RAJINDER KAUR) SENIOR PERSONAL ASSISTANT BRANCH OFFICER (Signed order is placed on the file)