ORDER : ANOOP KUMAR DHAND, J. 1. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayer:- “It is, therefore most respectfully prayed that call the entire record of the case and after considering the same, the respondents may be directed to release the pensionary and other benefits from 01.05.1980 to 16.07.2008 at the interest of 9% per annum. Any other appropriate order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts of the case may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the controversy involved in this writ petition has already been set at rest by this Court in the case of Om Prakash Gupta vs. The State of Rajasthan & Others while deciding S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.553/2015 vide order dated 18.01.2023, whereby this Court while allowing the petition, directed the respondents to prepare the petitioner’s case afresh, taking into consideration the entire service rendered by him with the Rajasthan Board of Homeopathic Medicine and the Department of Ayurveda, and after the deposition of amount of P.F./Gratuity by the petitioner with the Department of Ayurveda, which he has received from the parent organisation i.e., the Rajasthan Board of Homeopathic Medicine. Learned counsel also submits that a further direction has been issued for releasing the payment, after commutation of pension and other retiral benefits to him. 3. Learned counsel submits that the order passed by this Court in the case of Om Prakash Gupta (supra) was assailed by the respondent-State before the Division Bench of this Court by way of filing D.B. SAW No.378/2024 but the said appeal has been dismissed in default. Hence, under these circumstances, the order passed in the case of Om Prakash Gupta (supra) has attained finality and, thereafter, all the pensionary benefits have been granted to him by issuing Pension Payment Order. Learned counsel submits that, under these circumstances, same directions/order be passed in the instant case as well. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-state opposed the arguments raised by counsel for the petitioner and submitted that even in the case Om Prakash Gupta (Supra) the said petitioner was also not entitled to get the benefits, sought by him in his writ petition filed before this Court. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-state opposed the arguments raised by counsel for the petitioner and submitted that even in the case Om Prakash Gupta (Supra) the said petitioner was also not entitled to get the benefits, sought by him in his writ petition filed before this Court. Learned counsel submits that the services rendered by the petitioner and the said Om Prakash Gupta in the Rajasthan Board of Homeopathic Medicine cannot be taken into account for the purpose of granting pensionary benefits, hence, under these circumstances, the interference of this Court is not warranted. 5. Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on the record. 6. Initially, both the petitioner and the said Om Prakash Gupta were appointed on the post of LDC with Rajasthan Board of Homeopathic Medicine and, thereafter, their services were absorbed by the Department of Ayurveda and both of them, along-with other similarly situated persons joined the department of Ayurveda but subsequently all of them were relieved vide order dated 16.05.1998. The petitioner and the said Om Prakash Gupta did not assail the aforesaid order before this Court but they submitted representation before the authorities concerned for redressal of their grievances but rest of the persons i.e. Ajay Kumar Sharma, Mahesh Dutt Sharma, Hari Prakash Sharma and Shyam Sundar Tiwari approached this Court by way of filling different writ petitions and the same were disposed of by the Co- ordinate Bench of this Court in a batch of writ petitions with the lead case of Ajay Kumar Sharma vs. State of Rajasthan ( S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6979/2008 ) vide order dated 10.02.2020 whereby all the aforesaid writ petitions were allowed and the impugned order dated 15.07.2008 was quashed and set aside and the respondents were directed to grant all the pensionary and service benefits to them with interest. 7. Considering all the above factual aspect of the matter and the writ petition submitted by the similarly situated person i.e. Om Prakash Gupta was allowed by this Court vide order dated 18.01.2023 with the following observations and directions:- “Heard. Considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and perused the material available on record. 7. Considering all the above factual aspect of the matter and the writ petition submitted by the similarly situated person i.e. Om Prakash Gupta was allowed by this Court vide order dated 18.01.2023 with the following observations and directions:- “Heard. Considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and perused the material available on record. This fact is not in dispute that the petitioner was appointed on the post of Stenographer with the Board of Homeopathic Medicine on 30.07.1983 and other similarly situated persons namely Mahaveer Singh, Ajay Kumar Sharma, Shyam Sunder Tiwari and Hari Prasad Sharma were also appointed with the same Department on their respective posts of LDC and Class-IV. This fact is also not in dispute that all these posts were declared as surplus and services of all these persons including the petitioner were absorbed with the Department of Ayurveda vide order dated 12.05.1998 and 13.05.1998. Thereafter the services of all these persons remained continued with the Department of Ayurveda till passing of the order dated 09.07.2008. On 09.07.2008 the Department of Ayurveda repatriated the services of all these persons to the original Department i.e. the Board of Homeopathic Medicine. Except Mahaveer Singh, all these persons including the petitioner approached this Court by way of filing different writ petitions and an interim order was passed in favour of Ajay Kumar Sharma, Shyam Sunder Tiwari and Hari Prasad Sharma and they were allowed to continue with the Department of Ayurveda. Since no interim order was passed in favour of the petitioner, hence he was left with no other option except to join the Board of Homeopathic Medicine. By remaining in said Department, he reached to the age of superannuation and at that point of time he was insisted by the State – respondents to withdrew the writ petition filed by him for extending him the retiral benefits. So under those compelling circumstances, he was left with no other option except to withdraw the Writ Petition No.13536/2008 pending before this Court and thereafter the retiral dues of the petitioner were released. The only question which remains for consideration by this Court is that whether the petitioner is also entitled to get the similar benefits which have been extended to the similarly situated persons Mahesh Datt Sharma, Ajay Kumar Sharma, Shyam Sunder Tiwari and Hari Prasad Sharma. The only question which remains for consideration by this Court is that whether the petitioner is also entitled to get the similar benefits which have been extended to the similarly situated persons Mahesh Datt Sharma, Ajay Kumar Sharma, Shyam Sunder Tiwari and Hari Prasad Sharma. The only distinction between the case of the present petitioner with the aforesaid persons is that no interim was passed in favour of the petitioner against the order dated 09.07.2008. It is worthy to note here that Mahesh Datt Sharma stood retire prior to passing of the order dated 09.07.2008. Hence, the order dated 09.07.2008 could not be make effective upon him. The writ petition filed by the said Mahesh Datt Sharma has been disposed of by the Co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 27.03.2017 by observing in para No.8 thus: “8. In view of above, it is now directed that the respondents shall prepare pension case of the petitioner afresh taking into consideration the entire period of service rendered by him with Rajasthan Board of Homeopathic Medicine and Ayurved Department after the petitioner having deposited with the Ayurved Department the amount of PF/Gratuity to the tune of Rs.1,31,377/-which he had received from Rajasthan Board of Homeopathic Medicine and after commutation of pension and other retiral benefits, the payment be made to him accordingly by the respondents within a period of two months from the date the certified copy of this order is communicated in their office. However, it is made clear that no interest be paid to the petitioner on the said amount. Since the entire litigation occurred on account of the laxity on the part of the Ayurved Department in not counting earlier period of service and in not depositing the PF/Gratuity in time as directed in the absorption order dt. 27/05/1998, a lump-sumamount of Rs.50,000/- is directed to paid to the petitioner as expenses for the litigation which the petitioner has faced.” Following the aforesaid directions issued in the case of Mahesh Datt Sharma (supra), the Co- ordinate Bench of Court has allowed the writ petitions filed by the Ajay Kumar Sharma, Shyam Sunder Tiwari and Hari Prasad Sharma vide order dated 10.02.2020 by observing thus: “In the present case, the order dt. 12.5.1998 is unambiguous and mentions that the services of the five employees which include the petitioners Ajay Kumar Sharma and Shyam Sunder Tiwari were to be absorbed with Rajasthan Ayurved Department. It was also directed that PF, gratuity amount was to be deposited in terms of GF and AR with Ayurved Department pursuant to the order dt.12.5.1998. Therefore, earlier services were to be counted. In the light of the above, the impugned order dt. 15.7.2008 could not have been passed as the lien after absorption does not continue with the earlier Department. Absorption is also one way of appointment. In the circumstances, the earlier period of service is required to be counted. Keeping in view the above, the impugned order dt.15.7.2008 is quashed and set aside and interim order passed by this court is made absolute. Petitioners shall be treated to have retired from the Department of Ayurved and would be granted all retiral benefits including the pension etc. The amount was required to be released in April 2019 but has not been released apparently on account of the pendency of the present writ petitions. In view thereof, petitioners shall not be entitled to interest on the pension amount however they will get interest on the gratuity @ 9 per cent and the services rendered with Board of Homeopathic Medicine shall be counted in terms of the order passed in Mahesh Dutt (supra). The benefit of 9, 18, 27 years of service shall also be extended to the petitioner and the exercise in this regard shall be conducted within a period of three months. The petitioners shall also be granted revised pension. In the case of Shyam Sunder (supra)the order of Mahesh Dutt shall also apply and his period of services rendered with Board of Homeopathic Medicine shall be considered. Deceased Hari Prasad in S B CWP No. 6981/2008 would also been titled to the aforesaid benefit released in favour of petitioners Ajay Kumar and Shyam Sunder Tiwari and Mahesh Dutt (supra) in the same terms. All these writ petitions stand allowed. All pending applications also stand disposed of. It is settled proposition of law that as per Article 14 of the Constitution of India equal should be treated as equal and there should not be any discrimination between the case of two equals. All these writ petitions stand allowed. All pending applications also stand disposed of. It is settled proposition of law that as per Article 14 of the Constitution of India equal should be treated as equal and there should not be any discrimination between the case of two equals. The facts narrated herein above clearly indicates that the case of the petitioner was at par with the case of similarly situated persons but he has been deprived to get benefits which have been extended to the above persons only for the simple reason that no interim was passed in his favour against the order dated 09.07.2008. Otherwise, there is no distinction between the case of present petitioner with the case of above similarly situated persons. In view of the discussions made here in above, instant petition stands disposed of with the directions to the respondents to prepare the case of the petitioner afresh taking into consideration the entire period of service rendered by him with the Rajasthan Board of Homeopathic Medicine and Ayurveda Department after the petitioner having deposited the amount of PF/ gratuity with the Ayurveda Department which he has received from the Rajasthan Board of Homeopathic Medicine and after commutation of pension and other retiral benefits, the payment be made to him accordingly by the respondents within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. However, it is made clear that no interest be paid to the petitioner on the said amount. With the aforesaid observations, instant petition stands disposed of.” 8. The judgment passed by this Court in the case of Om Prakash Gupta (supra) was assailed by the respondent-State before the Division Bench by way of filing D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No.378/2024, however, the same was rejected and the order passed by this Court has attained finality and, thereafter, pensionary benefits along with consequential benefits have been granted to the said Om Prakash Gupta by taking into account the services rendered by him in both the Departments. 9. In view of the discussions made hereinabove, the instant writ petition also stands disposed of. 9. In view of the discussions made hereinabove, the instant writ petition also stands disposed of. The respondents are directed to prepare the case of the petitioner afresh, taking into consideration the entire service rendered by him with the Rajasthan Board of Homeopathic Medicine of Department of Ayurveda after deposition of the amount of PF/gratuity with the Department of Ayurveda by the petitioner, which he has received from the Rajasthan Board of Homeopathic Medicine and after commutation of pension and all other retiral benefits, the payment be made to the petitioner accordingly by the respondents within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. However, it is made clear that the petitioner would not be entitled to get any interest from the respondents on the aforesaid amount. 10. With the aforesaid observations, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. 11. Pending application, if any, also stand disposed of.