[2025:RJ-JP:46971] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15303/2025 Chhotu Ram Chaudhary Son Of Shri Kewal Ram, Aged About 65 Years, Resident Of Saras Hotel Ke Pichhe, Ajeet Nagar, Bharatpur (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus 1. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corportation, Through Its Managing Director, Parivahan Marg, Chomu House, Jaipur (Raj.) 2. The Executive Director (Admin), Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Parivahan Marg, Chomu House, Jaipur (Raj.) 3. The Chief Manager, Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Kota Depot, District Sikar (Raj.) 4. Chief Manager, Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Lhagarh Bharatpur Depot, District Bharatpur (Raj.) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Laxmikant Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Nitin Sinsinwar HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 20/11/2025 1. Instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with following prayers: “It is, therefore, humbly prayed that the writ petition of the petitioner may kindly be accepted and allowed and; (i) by an appropriate writ, order of directions in the nature thereof, thereby the respondent may kindly be directed to reimburse the entire dues of the petitioner i.e. overtime, G.H., Rest with 6% p.a. interest and interest on gratuity in the larger interest of justice. [2025:RJ-JP:46971] (2 of 3) [CW-15303/2025] (ii) any other appropriate order or direction which the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner; (iii) Cost of the Writ Petition be awarded in favour of the petitioner.” 2. Mr. Nitin Sinsinwar, Advocate puts in appearance on behalf of respondent(s). 3. Office is directed to reflect the name of Mr. Nitin Sinsinwar, Advocate as counsel for respondent(s). 4. Learned counsel for petitioner while placing reliance upon order dated 26.07.2019 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11474/2019 Bhori Lal Meena Vs. RSRTC submits that the controversy raised herein is already decided by this Hon’ble Court in case of Prahlad Singh Vs. Managing Director, RSRTC, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14748/2014 and further in case of Shankar Lal Choudhary Vs. Shree Rajesh Yadav & Ors. in S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 1500/2016 and the respondent(s) are complying the directions as given in said matters. 5. Learned counsel for respondent submits that if the facts of the case as decided earlier are applicable in the instant case then they will extend the benefit available to the petitioner. 6. Having considered aforesaid, it is appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to submit a representation in light of judgment as referred by him. [2025:RJ-JP:46971] (3 of 3) [CW-15303/2025] 7. Considered the grievance raised herein, the petitioner is given a liberty to submit a representation to the respondents- Authority within a period of 30 days raising all grounds and the respondents-Authority are directed to decide the representation in light of judgments as referred hereinabove, but in case of deviation with a reasoned and speaking order within a period of 30 days from date of receipt of representation. After the decision, the respondents are under an obligation to communicate the decision to the petitioner either by way of speed post or through E-mail, if petitioner has provided E-mail in his representation. If the petitioner is still aggrieved, he has a liberty to approach this Court with fresh petition. 8. With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petition with pending application, if any, stands disposed of. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J Chetna/34