[2025:RJ-JP:9736-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR (1) D. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17484/2024 Rajasthan Sevanivrat Police Kalyan Sansthan, Through Its President Vasudev Singh S/o Mool Singh Aged About 62, 518, Hanuman Nagar Extension, Sirsi Road, Jaipur-302021. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Though Its Chief Secretary, Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj).302005. 2. Finance Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Through Additional Chief Secretary, Secretariat, Jaipur, 302005. 3. Home Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Through Additional Chief Secretary, Secretariat, Jaipur, 302005. 4. Pension And Pensioners Welfare Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Through The Director, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur 302015 ----Respondents Connected With (2) D. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16874/2024 1. Badri Narayan Nandwana S/o Late Shri Hanumat Prasad Ji Nandwana, Resident Of 166, Milap Nagar, Tonk Road, Jaipur. 2. Nawal Kishore Mishra S/o Shri Kishan Lal, Resident Of 32- B, Janpath, Radha Kishan Colony, Ramnagar, Sodala, Jaipur. 3. Sattar S/o Mola Bux, R/o Bhutto Ka Bas, Bikaner. ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Finance, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur - 302005. 2. Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Limited, Through Its Secretary, Vidyut Bhawan, Jan Path, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur - 302005. ----Respondents [2025:RJ-JP:9736-DB] (2 of 4) [CW-17484/2024] (3) D. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11229/2024 Omprakash Bansal S/o Shri Ramsharan Lal, Aged About 73 Years, Retired Protocol Officer And Administrative Officer District Judge Karauli, At Present R/o Vaidh Colony, Gangapur City, District Ganagapur City- 322201 (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Chief Secretary, Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.) 2. The Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Rajasthan Government, Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.) 3. Director, Pension And Pensioner Welfare Department, Rajasthan Government, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur (Raj.) ----Respondents (4) D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18294/2024 Ramesh Chand Jangid S/o Shri Badri Lal Jangid, 102-A, Deep Nagar (D.p. Colony-Ii), New Sanganer Road, Jaipur. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Finance, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur- 302005. 2. Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Limited, Through Its Secretary, Vidyut Bhawan, Jan Path, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur-302005. ----Respondents For Petitioners : Mr. H.V. Nandwana Advocate with Mr. Premchand Sharma Advocate and Mr. Yashvardhan Nandwana Advocate. Mr. Anand Sharma Advocate on behalf of Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma Advocate. For Respondents : Mr. Rajendra Prasad Advocate General assisted by Ms. Harshita Thakral Advocate. Mr. Kartikey Sharma Advocate on behalf of Mr. Sandeep Taneja Additional Advocate General. [2025:RJ-JP:9736-DB] (3 of 4) [CW-17484/2024] HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHUWAN GOYAL Order 05 /03/2025 1. With the consent of the parties, we are inclined to dispose off these writ petitions at this stage. 2. The grievance raised through these writ petitions essentially centers around the period within which the full pension is to be restored under the provisions contained in Rule 29 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Commutation of Pension) Rules, 1996 (herein referred to as ‘the Rules of 1996’). Full pension is restored after a period of 14 years in case of commutation of pension under the scheme of the Rules of 1996. The period of restoration of the pension, according to the petitioners, is such that it results in financial loss and according to the petitioners, the restoration period is required to be reworked in the light of the recommendations made by Fifth Pay Commission and the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of “Common Cause”, A Registered Society & Ors. Vs. Union of India (1987) 1 SCC 142. 3. Learned Advocate General would submit that these are essentially matters of policy decision. He would bring to the notice of the Court the order passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in the case of Shila Devi & Ors Vs. State of Punjab & Ors.(Civil Writ Petition No. 9426/2023 & other connected matters decided on 27.11.2024), wherein the similar challenge was repelled. [2025:RJ-JP:9736-DB] (4 of 4) [CW-17484/2024] 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that at this stage, these petitions may be disposed off for consideration of the petitioners’ representations by the State with liberty to revive, in case, the grievance is not redressed. 5. Learned Advocate General would submit that if any representations are made, the State would examine the same. 6. Taking into consideration the nature of exercise required to be undertaken which involves financial implications also, the State may constitute a Committee of Experts which shall examine the grievance of the pensioners-petitioners. The Committee may submit its recommendations to the State and it will be open for the State to take such decision as it considers appropriate in the matters. 7. Taking into consideration that grievance has been raised by those who are retired employees, the Committee shall endeavour to submit its report within a period of six months. 8. The writ petitions are disposed off accordingly with liberty to file fresh petition in case grievance is not redressed. 9. Office is directed to place a copy of this order on record of each connected petition. (BHUWAN GOYAL),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),CJ MANOJ NARWANI-ANU/49-52