[2026:RJ-JP:1436] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10288/2018 Smt Vishakha Devi Wife Of Shri Radhey Shyam, aged about 56 years, R/o House No. 741, Lawan Raja Ka Ghar, Bandri Ka Nasik, Chaukari Gangapole, Jaipur ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan Through The Principal Secretary, Ayurveda Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur 2. The Director, Ayurveda Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dev Kishan Purohit for Mr. Prem Krishan Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vishnu Dutt Sharma, AAAG for Mr. Bhuwnesh Sharma, AAG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 13/01/2026 1. Instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with following prayers: “i. to direct the respondent to pay the petitioner minimum pay scale of the post including dearness allowance and other allowances which are part of the pay from the date the payment was last made in the year 2006. ii. the respondent may further be directed to continue this payment till the retirement of the petitioner and her retirement benefits be also calculated accordingly subject to the any other order of the court allowing regularisation benefits to the petitioner. iii. to issue any other appropriate writ, order of direction as may be deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. iv. to allow [2026:RJ-JP:1436] (2 of 5) [CW-10288/2018] the cost of this writ petition in favour of the petitioner.” 2. During the course of arguments, it has been brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioner raised a Labour dispute under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, and the same was referred to the Labour Court, Jaipur. Ultimately, on 19.06.1992, an award was passed in a reference under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, and the respondents were directed to reinstate the services of the petitioner, as the termination order dated 14.03.1986 was declared illegal and unfair. 3. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a writ petition, bearing No. 7367/1993, before this Court, and the same was allowed on 28.04.2006 with the following order: “Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to pay the minimum of the pay-scale to the petitioner on the post of Paricharak, from the date of award, i.e. 19.6.1992 passed by the Labour Court and also consider the petitioner for giving her. regular appointment on the post in question. The arrears be paid within 30 days from the date of receipt of cartified copy or this order.” 4. Thereafter, the said order was challenged by the State of Rajasthan and the concerned department by filing DB Special Appeal Writ No. 948/2006. On 02.03.2007, the appeal was dismissed, meaning thereby that the order dated 28.04.2006 attained finality with regard to the ground of minimum pay scale. 5. Thereafter, the petitioner filed another writ petition bearing No. 2003/2007, and the same was disposed of by this Court on 19.01.2016 with the following order: [2026:RJ-JP:1436] (3 of 5) [CW-10288/2018] “Looking to all these reasons and as none is there to oppose the writ petition and the reply filed by the non-petitioner is quite sketchy, I find ground to allow the writ petition. Accordingly, writ petition is allowed. Non-petitioners are directed to consider case of the petitioner for Rajasthan regularisation of her services which would not be denied treating her to be part time employee or due to non-availability of the post. The regularisation would be made after considering her case in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Umadevi (supra). The consequential order of regularisation would be passed after completion of exercise within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.” 6. The respondents challenged the said order by filing DB Special Appeal Writ No. 729/2016, which was decided by the Division Bench on 28.07.2017. The order was modified in the following manner:- “The writ-appeal is partially allowed. The direction issued by the learned Single Judge to consider respondent’s entitlement for regularisation by treating that her initial appointment was against a sanctioned post is set aside. The writ petition filed by the respondent is disposed of with a direction that the appellant shall conduct an exercise within three months to identify whether there was a regular vacant post when respondent was appointed as a Paricharika and if it is found that there was a entitlement shall be placed before a Screening Committee in terms of Sub-Rule (4) of Rule 6 of the Rajasthan Class-IV Service (Recruitmert and other Service Conditions) Rules, 1999. Needful be done within four months from today.” 7. The petitioner filed a review before the Division Bench, and DB Petition Revision No. 404/2017, was dismissed on 23.03.2018. In the meanwhile, contempt petitions were filed [2026:RJ-JP:1436] (4 of 5) [CW-10288/2018] and both were dismissed. The petitioner thereafter approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court, and SLP (C) Nos. 019780–019781/2018, which were also dismissed on 01.10.2018. 8. The contention of the petitioner is that, despite the orders passed by this Hon’ble Court, the respondents have not granted the minimum of the pay scale as directed by this Hon’ble Court. The material on record indicates that by order dated 28.04.2006, this Court directed the respondents to pay the minimum of the pay scale to the petitioner on the post of Paricharak from the date of the award, i.e., 19.06.1992, passed by the Labour Court. This order has neither been set aside nor modified by the Division Bench in any of the D.B. Special Appeal (Writ), thus, the respondents are duty-bound to accord the minimum of the pay scale from 19.06.1992. 9. The material on record clearly indicates that the petitioner has not been granted the minimum of the pay scale, and no document showing grant of such scale or compliance with the order has been filed on record. Therefore, it is appropriate to allow this writ petition only to the said extent, with a direction to the respondents to make payment on the basis of the minimum of the pay scale as directed by this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7367/1993. 10. In view of the discussion made hereinabove, the present writ petition is allowed, and the respondents are directed to compute and calculate the entitlement and the amount due under the order dated 28.04.2006 passed in S.B. Civil writ [2026:RJ-JP:1436] (5 of 5) [CW-10288/2018] petition no. 7367/1993 by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court and to make payment within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Needless to say, if the payment is not made within a period of 60 days, the respondents shall be liable to make payment at the rate of 9% per annum to the petitioner. 11. However, in case if any payment has already been made, the respondents may set off the amount already paid to the petitioner. The respondents, after computation and calculation, shall provide the details along with a copy of the computation sheet in the form of a due-drawn statement to the petitioner. 12. The writ petition along with misc. application, if any, stands disposed of. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J CHETNA BEHRANI /16