HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 132/2021 IN S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9156/2011 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Local Self Department, Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan). 2. The Principal Secretary, Finance Department (Rules Division), Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan). 3. The Deputy Secretary, Local Self Department, Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan). 4. The Executive Officer, Municipal Board, Jhalawar (Rajasthan). ----Appellants Versus 1. Mohan Lal Goyal S/o Ram Phool Goyal, Resident Of S-14, Lav Kush Nagar - Ii, Tonk Phatak, Jaipur Rajasthan (Since Deceased) Through Legal Representatives 2. Asha Goyal W/o Late Mohan Lal Goyal, Aged About 71 Years, R/o- S-14, Lav Kush Nagar-Ii, Tonk Phatak, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 3. Smt. Seema Mittal D/o Late Mohan Lal Goyal W/o Shri Anil Mittal, Aged About 55 Years, R/o- A-4, Triveni Nagar, Gopalpura Bye Pass, Gopalpura Gaon, Jaipur, Rajasthan - 302018. 4. Laxmi Kant Goyal S/o Late Mohan Lal Goyal, Aged About 50 Years, R/o- S-14, Luv Kush Nagar-Ii, Tonk Phatak, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 5. Ravi Agarwal S/o Late Mohan Lal Goyal, Aged About 44 Years, R/o- S-14, Luv Kush Nagar-Ii, Tonk Phatak, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 6. Shashi Kant Goyal S/o Late Mohal Lal Goyal, Aged About 43 Years, R/o- S-14, Luv Kush Nagar-Ii, Tonk Phatak, Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Respondents (2 of 3) [SAW-132/2021] For Appellant(s) : Mr. G.S. Gill, AAG assisted by Ms. Shikha Sharma. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ravi Shanker Sharma. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA Order 19/05/2025 This appeal has been filed by the appellant-State against the judgment dated 26.08.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9156/2011 in which the respondent- petitioner filed aforesaid writ petition before the learned Single Judge with a prayer to quash and set aside the notification dated 24.03.2011 issued by the respondents. Learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of the State argued that the learned Single Bench has erred in allowing the benefits to the respondent-petitioner without quashing the notification dated 24.03.2011. Counsel further argued that financial benefits have been granted to its employees by the State Government from a particular date, and without quashing the provisions of the impugned notification, such benefits could not be granted to the respondent-petitioner. In support of the contentions, learned Additional Advocate General has relied upon the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Andhra Pradesh & ors. Vs. N. Subbarayudu & Ors. reported in 2008 (14) SCC 702 wherein para No.5, has held as under:- “5. In a catena of decisions of this Court it has been held that the cut-off date is fixed by the executive authority keeping in view the economic conditions, financial constraints and many other administrative and other attending (3 of 3) [SAW-132/2021] circumstances. This Court is also of the view that fixing cut-off dates is within the domain of the executive authority and the court should not normally interfere with the fixation of cut- off date by the executive authority unless such order appears to be on the face of it blatantly discriminatory and arbitrary.” Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-petitioner opposed the appeal and argued that the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge is just and legal and the same requires no interference as the amended notification has been issued in continuation of the earlier notification. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record as well as the judgment impugned passed by the learned Single Judge. This appeal filed on behalf of the appellant deserves to be allowed for the reasons; firstly, looking to the financial implications, the appellant-State has a right to fix the date of applicability of the financial benefits to its employees from a particular date; secondly, without quashing the notification dated 24.03.2011 the relief sought by the respondent-petitioner could not be granted to him and lastly, the learned Single Judge has erred in allowing the writ petition without quashing of the said notification. In that view of the matter, this appeal is allowed and the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge dated 26.08.2019 is set aside. (ANAND SHARMA),J (INDERJEET SINGH),J MG/50