HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Writ Miscellaneous Application No. 299/2024 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.10702/2024 Vidhyadhar Singh S/o Shri Megha Ram, Aged About 73 Years, R/o Adarsh Colony, Gudha Gaurji, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.). ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Education Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.). 2. The Director, Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner 3. District Education Officer (Secondary Education), H.q. Jhunjhunu 4. The Director, Directorate Of Pension And Pensioners Welfare, Rajasthan, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur (Raj.). ----Respondents Connected With S.B. Writ Miscellaneous Application No. 296/2024 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.10697/2024 Ram Kumar Saini S/o Shri Dhokalram Saini, Aged About 81 Years, R/o Village Papada, Tehsil Udaipurwati, District Jhunjhunu Now District Neemkathana (Raj.). ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Education Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj). 2. The Director, Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner. 3. District Education Officer (Education), H.q. Jhunjhunu. 4. Principal, Govt. Sr. Secondary School Bhatiwar, District Jhunjhunu. 5. The Director, Directorate Of Pension And Pensioners Welfare, Rajasthan, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur (Raj). ----Respondents (2 of 4) [WMAP-299/2024] For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Basant Singh Chhaba, AAG with Mr.Rahul Gupta, Mr.Shubhendu Pilania & Ms.Mahi Choudhary For Respondent(s) : Mr.Nagendra Sharma for Mr.Sanjay Mehla JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 12/08/2025 1. Since, common question of law and facts are involved in these applications, hence, with the consent of counsel for the parties, arguments have been heard together and both the applications are heard together and decided by this common order. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that these applications have been submitted for recall of the order dated 08.07.2024 passed by this Court while deciding a batch of writ petitions in the light of the judgment passed by this Court in the case of Vijay Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan while deciding S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.21/2020. 3. Counsel submits that the issue involved in the case of Vijay Singh (supra) was pertaining to the grant of benefit of annual increment to those employees who have retired on 30th June. Counsel submits that in the case of Vidhyadhar Singh, he has retired on 31.05.2011 and not on 30th June, hence, the directions issued in the case of Vijay Singh (supra) are not applicable in this case. 4. Counsel submits that in the case of Ram Kumar Saini, he retired on 30.06.2001, however, the benefits of the 6th Pay (3 of 4) [WMAP-299/2024] Commission are granted and applicable only upon those employees who have retired after 2007, while in the instant case, he retired much prior to the date of the enforcement of the 6th Pay Commission, hence, under these circumstances, the direction issued in the case of Vijay Singh (supra) are not applicable in this case as well. 5. Counsel submits that in view of the submissions made hereinabove, the order dated 08.07.2024 be recalled. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents opposes the arguments raised by counsel for the petitioner, but he is not in a position to controvert the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. 7. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on record. 8. Considering the arguments put forward by learned counsel for the petitioner and looking to the fact that the petitioner- Vidhyadhar Singh retired on 31.05.2011 and not on 30.06.2011, hence, the judgment passed in the case of Vijay Singh (supra) is not applicable in his case likewise in the case of Ram Kumar Saini he stood retired on 30.06.2001 while the scheme of the 6th Pay Commission came and was made applicable, w.e.f. 2007, hence, in the present case also the directions issued in the case of Vijay Singh (supra) are not applicable. 9. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case, the order dated 08.07.2024 stands recalled. The writ petition submitted by the respective petitioner-Vidhyadhar Singh and Ram Kumar Saini are restored to its original number. (4 of 4) [WMAP-299/2024] 10. Office is directed to list those writ petitions before the Roster Bench for hearing and disposal of their case on the basis of merit and issues involved in those writ petitions. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Aayush Sharma /63-64