Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 5901 (RAJ)

KAILASH CHAND v. STATE OF RAJ AND ORS

CW/2851/2009 · 2025-02-07

Anoop Kumar Dhand

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2851/2009 Kailash Chand S/o Shri Chiranji Lal, R/o Modi House, Opposite Ware House, Nazar Bagh Road, Tonk Raj. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State of Rajasthan through Secretary, Public Works Department, Govt. of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur 2. The Chief Engineer, Public Works Department, Jaipur 3. The Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, NH- Division, Tonk 4. The Assistant Director, Pension and Pension Welfare Department, Divisional Office Ajmer ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kunal Meena for Mr. Suresh Charan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sharad Joshi-AGC JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 07/02/2025 1. By way of filing this writ petition, a prayer has been made for issuing a direction to the respondents to release the retiral benefits. 2. At the outset, counsel for the respondents apprised this Court that one more petition was submitted by the petitioner i.e. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5775/1998, wherein a direction was issued to the respondents for making the payment of the retiral benefits to the petitioner. Counsel submits that when the order passed by this Court was not complied with then a contempt petition bearing No. 828/2012, was submitted before this Court (2 of 2) [CW-2851/2009] and thereafter, the payment of the retiral benefits has been paid to the petitioner along with interest on delayed payment of retiral dues vide Demand Draft No. 51300 dated 10.09.2014. Counsel submits that under the changed circumstances, no cause of action survives with the petitioner to continue with this petition as the relief sought in this petition has already been granted, hence, this petition has become infructuous. 3. Dismissed as having become infructuous. 4. Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand dismissed. 5. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to move an application for revival of this petition, in case, any cause of action/grievance still survives. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Ashu/52