DR. DEELIP KUMAR SHARMA S/O NATVAR LAL SHARMA v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CW/5330/2025 · 2025-04-15
Anand Sharma, Manindra Mohan Shrivastava
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 14832 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 14832 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:16023-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5330/2025
1. Dr. Deelip Kumar Sharma S/o Natvar Lal Sharma, Aged About 66 Years, R/o Vinayakam, Patashi Gali, Bhilwara Road, Kankroli, Rajsamand,313324
2. Dr. Parmeshwar Lal Acharya S/o Chunni Lal Acharya, Aged About 64 Years, R/o Sundar Colony, Rajsamand Kankroli,313324.
3. Dr. Indu Bala Jain C/o Devi Lal Jain, Aged About 64 Years, R/o 67, Subhash Nagar, Gali No. 3, Girwa, Udaipur, Rajasthan, 313001.
4. Dr. Laxmi Lal Joshi S/o Kalu Ram Joshi, Aged About 66 Years, R/o Otc, B-Block, Sajjan Nagar, Udaipur, Po Udaipur Shastri Circle, Dist. Udaipur,313001.
5. Dr. Sudhakar Mishra S/o Madhav Prasad Mishra, Aged About 66 Years, R/o D-6-M,d Colony, Naka Madar, Ajmer, Rajasthan 305001.
6. Dr. Deepak Sharma S/o Radheshyam Sharma, Aged About 65 Years, R/o A-127, M.d Colony, Naka Madar, Ajmer, Rajasthan, 305001.
7. Dr. Ramanand Dadhich S/o Ramchandra Dadhich, Aged About 69 Years, R/o Sugan Sadan Holi Than, Amet Rajsamand, Rajasthan-313332.
8. Pushkar Lal Choubisa S/o Bihari Lal Choubisa, Aged About 65 Years, R/o Bus Stand Kheroda, Udaipur, Rajasthan,313602 ----Petitioners Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Additional Chief Secretary, Department Of Ayurveda (Ayush) Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Ayurveda And Bhartiyachikitsa (Ayush), Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.
3. Dy. Secretary, Department Of Ayurveda And Bhartiyachikitsa (Ayush), Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.
[2025:RJ-JP:16023-DB] (2 of 3) [CW-5330/2025]
4. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.
5. Director Ayurveda, Directorate Of Ayurveda, Ajmer. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anurag Sharma with Mr. Rajdeep Rathore For Respondent(s) : Mr. Samee Khan on behalf of Mr. Bhuvnesh Sharma, AAG HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA
Judgment 15/04/2025
1. After the order was passed by this Court earlier on 20.09.2024 in another petition, new developments have been brought to the notice of this Court, one of them regarding dismissal of the Review Petition by the Hon’ble Supreme Court filed in the case of State of Rajasthan & Ors. Vs. Dr. Mahesh Chandra Sharma on 15.10.2024, as stated at the bar by learned counsel for the petitioners.
2.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has also placed before this Court order dated 27.09.2024 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of The State of Rajashtan & Ors. Vs. Pyare Lal Meena & Ors. (Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.10560/2024), wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has clarified that there is no stay on the judgment of the High Court and further that in the event the outstanding towards salary has not been paid, the same shall be cleared within a period of one week. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that
[2025:RJ-JP:16023-DB] (3 of 3) [CW-5330/2025] in the present case, the petitioners have retired and crossed the age of 62 years as on date.
3. In view of the above developments, we need not keep this petition pending and same is also finally disposed off in terms of
order passed earlier by this Court in the case of Dr. Mahesh Chandra Sharma & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. and other connected matters (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.13496/2021), decided on 13.07.2022. As the petitioners have retired and crossed the age of 62 years, they shall be deemed to have continued in service upto 62 years. This will require the respondents-authority to pass necessary orders treating them in service till attaining the age of 62 years in individual cases with consequential benefits of continuity of service. All other consequential action would also be required to be taken which include refixation of pension and other benefits.
(ANAND SHARMA),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),CJ N.Gandhi/Neeru/6