State Of Rajasthan vs Vijay Singh Bareth & Anr

The instant review petition has been filed seeking recalling/reviewing of the order dated 06.01.2015 passed by this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition

No.11501/2010 whereby the writ petition was decided as below:-

“Learned Dy.G.C. states that in view of the fact that the respondent Vijay Singh during the pendency of the writ petition has crossed the age of

superannuation, the writ petition has become infructuous.â€​

Manifestly, on going through the record, it comes out that the respondent was compulsorily retired from service of the petitioner. He challenged the

order of compulsory retirement by approaching the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Rajasthan, Jaipur which accepted the appeal vide

judgment dated 02.07.2008 and directed that the respondent shall be reinstated in service. It is not in dispute that pursuant to the said judgment passed

by the learned Tribunal, the respondent was reinstated in service and superannuated on 31.08.2009 during the pendency of this writ petition. No stay

order was passed by this Court while entertaining the writ petition, which was admitted on 23.02.2011. It cannot be denied that even after being

compulsorily retired, the respondent would be entitled to avail all the consequential service benefits viz. pension etc. It is also not in dispute that

pursuant to his reinstatement, the respondent has already served out remainder of his service tenure and has superannuates and thus, no recovery of

salary etc. can now be directed because he was serving on a Grade ‘C’ Post.

Apart from that, the review petition is delayed by 481 days. The explanation furnished in the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is not

satisfactory.

I am of the firm opinion that the writ petition was rightly got disposed of by learned Dy. Government Counsel by stating that the matter has become

infructuous. Thus, the order dated 06.01.2015 under review does not warrant any interference whatsoever.

Accordingly, the review petition is dismissed on the ground of delay and so also on merits.