Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 45919 (RAJ)

MEENAKSHI AGRAWAL DAUGHTER OF SHRI BHERU LAL AGRAWAL v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CW/17959/2025 · 2025-11-21

Ashok Kumar Jain

Special Leave Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:47295] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17959/2025 Meenakshi Agrawal Daughter Of Shri Bheru Lal Agrawal, Aged About 60 Years, Resident Of O-56, Govind Nagar, Housing Board, Kankroli, Rajsamand , Rajasthan ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary, Ayurved, And Bhartiya Chikitsa Vibhag, Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur 2. Dy. Secretary, Ayurved And Bhartiya Chikitsa Vibhag, Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur 3. Director, Ayurved And Bhartiya Chikitsa Vibhag, Government Of Rajasthan, Ajmer 4. Deputy Director, Ayurved Vibhag, Rajsamand ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Nitesh Kumar Garg For Respondent(s) : Mr. Bhuwnesh Sharma, AAG with Mr. Vishnu Dutt Sharma HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 21/11/2025 1. Mr. Bhuwnesh Sharma, AAG accepts notice for respondent(s). 2. Office is directed to reflect the name of Mr. Bhuwnesh Sharma as counsel for respondents. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner placing reliance upon judgment dated 13.07.2022 in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13496/2021 titled as Dr. Mahesh Chandra Sharma & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. and order dated 13.08.2025 in DB Writ Petition No. 9910/2025 titlled as Dr. Sukhram And Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. submits that this writ petition be disposed of in accordance with ratio as laid down by Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court. [2025:RJ-JP:47295] (2 of 2) [CW-17959/2025] 4. Learned AAG, Mr. Bhuwnesh Sharma submits that recently a SLP (Civil) No. 9563/2024 filed by State of Rajasthan, challenging orders in several cases, Hon’ble Supreme Court has referred the issue to a larger Bench and till disposal by the larger Bench an interim order was passed but he has no objection in case this writ petition is disposed of in accordance with judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court. 5. In case of Dr. Mahesh Chandra Sharma (supra), the age of superannuation of Ayush doctors increased to 62 years but in case of Dr. Sukhram (supra), a notional benefit is granted to those Ayush doctor(s) who superannuated at the age of 60 years but were not continued till attaining age of 62 years. 6. Having considered aforesaid and also the judgments as referred hereinabove, the writ petition is disposed of on terms as decided by Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP (c) No. 9563/2024 order dated 17.10.2025 (State of Raj. And Ors. Vs. Anisur Rahman). The petitioner is entitled to remain in employment till attaining age of 62 years in accordance with terms as directed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Anisur Rahman (supra). 7. With aforesaid, the instant writ petition stands disposed with pending application(s), if any. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J CHETNA BEHRANI /71