[2026:RJ-JP:9110] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3074/2026 Than Singh Son Of Late Sh. Haripal Singh, Aged About 83 Years, R/o Sirsai Mohalla, Kumher, Tehsil- Kumher, District- Deeg (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus 1. Union Of India, Through Secretary, Ministry Of Human Resources, Department Of Youth Affairs And Sports, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi. 2. State Of Rajasthan Through Secretary, Department Of Physical Education, School Education, Secretariat, Jaipur. 3. Director, Department Of Secondary School Education, Bikaner, Rajasthan. 4. Director, Department Of Secondary School Education, Administrative Building, Shiksha Sankul, J.l.n. Marg, Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. M.K. Dhakad For Respondent(s) : Mr. Abhishek Sharma for Mr. Manoj Sharma, AAG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 27/02/2026 1. Instant writ petition is preferred by petitioner with following prayer: “1. By an appropriate writ, order or direction the respondents may kindly be directed to grant the scales, which granted to the similar person Shri Balram Verma i.e. 2200-4000 (01.09.1988) and corresponding pay scale 8000-13500 (w.e.f. 01.09.1996) in the light of revision of pay scale rules in Rajasthan State in the year 1973, 1976, 1981 and 01.09.1988 and finally the corresponding pay scale 8000-13500 in the light of revision of pay scale Rules 1998 (w.e.f. 01.09.1996) as last pay drawn along with arreas and interest thereof@24% per annum in [2026:RJ-JP:9110] (2 of 3) [CW-3074/2026] the light of the order dated 02.11.1968 (Annexure passed by the State Government and in the light of order dated 16.08.1991 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Writ Petition No. 1198/1987, Ram Pratap Yadav Va. Union of India, and in the light of Balram Verma case with all consequential benefits, (as the petitioner stood superannuated), including revised pay fixations in every corresponding pay scales and post retrial benefits including arrears, PF and revised pension accordingly. 2. That the respondent may kindly be directed that the petitioner be given equally promotion of Grade-I on 22.12.1975 (Rs. 225-525) and Deputy D.E.O. Physical Education on 01.09.1988 (Rs. 2200-4000) and its corresponding scale Rs. 8000-13500 w.e.f. 01.09.1996 with all consequential benefits. 3. That the respondent may kindly be directed to Grant the benefits of pension to the petitioner accrued in their favour by way of issuing revised order of PPO and other revised orders relating to post retrial benefits in service with consequential benefits including the interest upon arrears at par with the similar person.” 2. Learned counsel for petitioner while referring and relying upon judgment dated 08.01.2026 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9072/2007 titled as Smt. Rameshwari Devi Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. submits that the controversy and the issue raised herein is already settled by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Hon’ble Court on the basis of ratio laid down in case of Balram Verma Vs. Union of India and Ors. (order dated 18.11.2017 in SB CWP No.18106/2012). He further submitted that instant writ petition be disposed of in accordance with aforesaid order. [2026:RJ-JP:9110] (3 of 3) [CW-3074/2026] 3. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for petitioner and also material placed on record, the writ petition may be disposed in light of Smt. Rameshwari Devi Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. (supra) and Balram Verma Vs. Union of India and Ors. (supra). 4. Considered the grievance raised herein, the petitioner is given a liberty to submit a representation to the respondents-Authority within a period of 30 days raising all grounds and the respondents-Authority are directed to consider and decide the representation in light of ratio laid down in case of Smt. Rameshwari Devi Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. (supra) and Balram Verma Vs. Union of India and Ors. (supra)., but in case of deviation with a reasoned and speaking order within a period of 30 days from date of receipt of representation. After the decision, the respondents are under an obligation to communicate the decision to the petitioner either by way of speed post or through E-mail, if petitioner has provided E- mail in his representation. If the petitioner is still aggrieved, he has a liberty to approach this Court with fresh petition. 5. Needless to say that if ratio is applicable upon facts of the case as claimed by the petitioner, then same benefits be extended to the petitioner. 6. With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petition with pending application, if any, stands disposed of. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J PREETI VALECHA /320