[2025:RJ-JP:10484] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 22230/2018 Kishan Lal Nihal S/o Shri Sukhram, aged about 61 Years, R/o Quarter No. 12 UIT Colony, Meyo Link Road, Pratap Nagar, Ajmer (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Rajasthan, through Secretary Urban Development and Housing Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. The Secretary, Ajmer Development Authority, Ajmer ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vinod Goyal For Respondent(s) : JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 07/03/2025 1. By filing the instant writ petition, the following prayer has been made: “It is therefore, respectfully prayed that your Lordship may graciously be pleased to accept and allow this writ petition and; (i) By an order of writ of mandamus, or by an appropriate, order or direction, the respondents be directed to the reinstate the petitioner back in service upto 31.07.2012 after judgment passed by the Hon'ble High Court on 08.09.2017 setting aside the conviction order in the criminal case and the respondents be directed to get the period counted for the purpose of Selection grade /A.C.P. with pay fixation accordingly, Seniority, E.L., the benefit of revised pay scale rules time to time with pay fixation accordingly, promotion and arrears thereof with 9% interest from date of initial appointment to the date of retirement i.e. 31.07.2012. The termination order dated 10.03.2005 as such be ordered be recalled/withdrawn respondents. by to the respondents. [2025:RJ-JP:10484] (2 of 3) [CW-22230/2018] (ii) by an appropriate writ order or direction the respondents be directed to accord the retiral benefits/pensionary benefits including gratuity and pension after making pay fixation as stated and arrears thereof be paid with 9%. (iii) Any other order which this Hon'ble Court deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be passed in favour of the petitioner.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, based on the judgment and conviction of the petitioner in a criminal case under Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (for short ‘Act of 1947’) vide judgment dated 17.02.1988, the services of the petitioner were discontinued, and he was terminated from service by the impugned order dated 10.03.2005. 3. Counsel submits that against the judgment dated 17.02.1988, S.B. Criminal Appeal No.106/1988 was preferred by the petitioner before this Court and the same was allowed vide judgment dated 08.09.2017 and the petitioner was acquitted from all the charges and the judgment dated 17.02.1988 has been quashed and set aside. Counsel submits that during pendency of the aforesaid criminal appeal, the petitioner attained the age of superannuation and after passing of the judgment dated 08.09.2017, the petitioner submitted an application for his reinstatement and for grant of all retiral and pensionary benefits. Counsel submits that applications were submitted by the petitioner on several occasions in the year 2018 but for the reasons best known to the respondent, till date, those applications have not been decided by passing a cogent and reasoned orders. Counsel submits that under these circumstances, interference of this Court is warranted. [2025:RJ-JP:10484] (3 of 3) [CW-22230/2018] 4. Considering the arguments put forward by counsel for the petitioner and looking to the fact that the dismissal order of the petitioner was passed on the basis of conviction of the petitioner in the judgment dated 17.02.1988 by which the petitioner was convicted under Section 5(2) of the act of 1947 whereby subsequently, he has been acquitted by this Court vide judgment dated 08.09.2017 and thereafter, several applications along with relevant documents have been submitted by the petitioner for doing the needful exercise but inspite of passing of considerable time, an application submitted by the petitioner have not been decided by the respondents by passing a reasoned and speaking orders, hence, this Court deems it just and proper to dispose of this instant petition with the directions to the respondents to decide the application of the petitioner by passing a reasoned and speaking orders, keeping in view, the judgment of acquittal of the petitioner. 5. Needless to observe, the order passed by this Court shall be complied with by the respondents within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 6. All pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J GARIMA /26