HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 153/2024 In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11439/2024 Mukesh Ranawat S/o Shri Kajod Singh, Aged About 64 Years, R/o Police Line Ke Pichhe, Uttam Bhawan Ke Pas, Ghorpura Mohalla, Bus Stand, Jhalawar, Distt. Jhalawar (Raj.) ----Review Respondent/Petitioner Versus 1. The Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Chomu House, Parivahan Marg, Jaipur Through Chairman Cum Managing Director (Raj.) 2. The Executive Director (Admin), Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Chomu House Jaipur (Rajasthan). 3. The Chief Manager, Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Jhalawar Depot, Distt. Jhalawar (Raj.) ----Review petitioner/Respondents For Review Petitioner(s) : Ms. Manjeet Kaur For review Respondent(s) : Mr. Sunil Kumar Singodiya JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 22/04/2025 1. Counsel for the review petitioner submits that the writ petition submitted by the petitioner was decided in the light of the order passed by Co-ordinate Benches of this Court in the following cases : SBCWP No. 12641/2021 (Babu Lal Sharma Vs. RSRTC and Anr.), SBCWP No. 10692/2012 (Rajkumar Tak Vs. Raj. State Road Transport Corp. and Anr.) and S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13500/2012 (Om Prakash Yadav Vs. Raj. State Road Transport (2 of 3) [WRW-153/2024] Corp. and Anr.). Counsel submits that the aforesaid judgments passed by the Co-ordinate Benches are not applicable on the facts and circumstances of the present case as in those cases, the controversy is confined to the Conductors who lost their ticket bags and FIR registered by them and looking to the aforesaid eventuality, the orders were passed by the Co-ordinate Benches for quashing the recovery orders by granting liberty to approach the Corporation to recover the printing charges of the lost tickets. Counsel submits that in the instant case, the duty was assigned to the review respondent to handover the printing charges to the Conductor and the same were to be received back after returning of the Conductor from the duty but such exercise was not done by him, hence the aforesaid judgments passed by the different Co- ordinate Benches are not applicable on the facts and circumstances of the present case and the matter is required to be decided and adjudicated on its merit. 2. Counsel for the review respondent opposed the prayer and submitted that the analogy/ratio with regard to stolen tickets has already been decided by the different Co-ordinate Benches of this Court and the aforesaid judgments were also relied by the review petitioners at the time of passing of the order by which the writ petition submitted by the review respondent was allowed by this Court, hence the present review petition is not maintainable and is liable to be rejected. 3. Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on record. 4. Perusal of the aforesaid judgments relied by the review respondent at the time of disposal of the writ petition indicates (3 of 3) [WRW-153/2024] that the issue was confined to the conductor not to the supervisor. The matter is required to be heard and decided after hearing the arguments of both side. 5. Considering the above factual aspect of the matter, the order dated 15.07.2024 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11439/2024 stands recalled and the writ petition is restored to its original number. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Ashu/43