Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2026 DAILYLAW 18094 (RAJ)

JAIPUR VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD v. LAXMI KANT SHARMA AND ORS

SAW/859/2014 · 2026-02-11

Inderjeet Singh, Ravi Chirania

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:RJ-JP:6475-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 859/2014 In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15311/2012 Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited Through Its Secretary Admn., Vidyut Bhawan, Janpath, Jaipur, Rajasthan ----Appellant Versus 1. Laxmi Kant Sharma S/o Shri Devki Nandan Ji, 20/14, Mansarowar, Jaipur, Rajasthan 2. Rajasthan Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Limited, Vidyut Bhawan, Janpath, Jaipur, Rajasthan 3. Rajesh Kumar Tiwari, Aen Through His Employer Secretary Admn., Vidyut Bhawan, Janpath, Jaipur, Rajasthan 4. Atul Kumar Gupta, Aen Through His Employer Secretary Admn., Vidyut Bhawan, Janpath, Jaipur, Rajasthan ----Respondents Connected With D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 1022/2014 In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15311/2012 Rajasthan Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Limited, Vidyut Bhawan, Janpath, Jaipur, Rajasthan ----Appellant Versus 1. Laxmi Kant Sharma S/o Shri Devki Nandan Ji, 20/14, Mansarovar, Jaipur, Rajasthan 2. Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited Through Its Secretaryadmn., Vidyut Bhawan, Janpath, Jaipur, Rajasthan 3. Rajesh Kumar Tiwari, Aen Through Is Employer Secretary Admn. Vidyut Bhawan, Janpath, Jaipur, Rajas 4. Atul Kumar Gupta, Aen Through His Employer Secretary Admn. Vidyut Bhawan, Janpath, Jaipur, Rajasth [2026:RJ-JP:6475-DB] (2 of 3) [SAW-859/2014] ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Sandeep Singh Shekhawat with Mr. Akshay Dutt Sharma Mr. Virendra Lodha, Sr. Adv. assisted by Mr. Ankit Rathore For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sandeep Singh Shekhawat in D.B. SAW No. 1022/2014 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI CHIRANIA Order 11/02/2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The matters relate to change of promotion order from 2002 to 1998-1999. This Court while admitting the Writ Petition on 29.05.2014, passed the following order:- “Counsel for appellant submits that a case throughout pleaded before the learned Single Judge was that as per the seniority list maintained of the Junior Engineers (E&M) by the appellant company promotions were made and which was taken note of for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer (E&M) and the incumbent Anil Kumar Gupta is the person immediate junior to the respondent was promoted on the post of Assistant Engineer (E&M) against the vacancy of 2002 and the learned Single Judge under order impugned has directed to promote the respondent without his suitability being adjudged against the vacancy of 1998-99 with further rider that if the appellant fails to pass appropriate orders within three months he shall be treated to have been promoted against the vacancy of 1998-99. Counsel for appellant is directed to place on record the seniority list of the Junior Engineer (P&M) which is maintained by the appellant company after un-bundling of Rajasthan State Electricity Board and may also place on record the seniority list of the Junior Engineer (E&M) according to which the person immediate junior to the respondent was considered for regular promotion to the [2026:RJ-JP:6475-DB] (3 of 3) [SAW-859/2014] post of Assistant Engineer (E&M) and what will be the effect of the order of punishment of stoppage of one grade annual increment without cumulative effect in such promotions which are to be made on the basis of seniority-cum-merit. Let the necessary documents referred to may be placed on record duly supported by the affidavit of officer-in- charge. Heard. Admit. Issue notice of appeal & stay application. In the meanwhile & until further orders, operation of the order of the learned Single Judge dt. 20.03.2014 shall remain stayed.” 3. As informed by counsel for the appellants, the writ petitioner, after completing the age of superannuation, has been retired from services. 4. Since the writ petitioner is not interested in pursuing the litigation after his retirement, we deem it just and proper to allow the special appeals. 5. Accordingly, both the special appeals are allowed and the order dated 20.03.2014 passed by learned Single Judge is set aside. (RAVI CHIRANIA),J (INDERJEET SINGH),J PAYAL DHAWAN /43-44