Bhagchand Khatik Son of Late Shri Laxmanji v. State of Rajasthan Through Its Principal Secretary, Mines Department, Government of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur
2017-11-08
VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA
body2017
DigiLaw.ai
ORDER : VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA, J. The petitioner, who was dismissed from service owing to conviction recorded by the jurisdictional Court in Criminal case No. 5/1988, for offence under Section 161 IPC (Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act) and Section 5(1)(d) read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 [Section 13(1)(d) and Section 13(2) of New Prevention of Corruption Act. 2. An appeal was successfully instituted by the petitioner, which was decided vide judgment and order dated 23rd January, 2015, acquitting the petitioner, extending the benefits of doubt, and thus, set aside the judgment and order dated 3rd October, 1992, recording conviction and sentence of the petitioner. 3. As a consequence of his acquittal, the petitioner was reinstated by the State-respondents, vide order dated 20th October, 2015, specifically observing that the period w.e.f. suspension of the petitioner, till his reinstatement, shall be considered on duty. 4. Mr. Ashish Saxena, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the State-respondents, have not extended the consequential benefits of promotion to the post of Foreman-I and the Assistant Mining Engineer while junior employees to the petitioner, have been accorded such benefits. 5. It is further pointed out that though a proposal has been sent to accord the benefits aforesaid, but the matter is being delayed and representations submitted in this regard, have failed to evoke any response. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and on a perusal of the materials available on record; for the present, the petitioner is required to address a comprehensive representation detailing out his grievance, enclosing the relevant documents therewith, within two weeks hereinafter. 7. In case, a representation is so addressed within the period aforesaid, the State-respondents are directed to consider and decide the same by a reasoned and speaking order, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible; however, in no case later than ten weeks from the date of receipt of the representation along with a certified copy of this order. 8. With the observations and directions, as indicated above, the writ as well as stay application stands disposed off.