1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR ORDER S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5218/2004 (Smt. Pan Bai Versus State of Rajasthan & Others) Date of Order :: 12th May, 2009 PRESENT HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN Shri Arvind Kumar Sharma for the petitioner Shri R.P. Singh, Additional Advocate General for the respondents BY THE COURT: The learned counsel for both the parties agree that present writ petition is fully covered by the decision of the Single Bench of this Court in Mohan Lal Sharma Versus State of Rajasthan {2002 (3) RLR page 216}, which has been upheld by the Division Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 21st April, 2009 in D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 935/2002, therefore, the writ petition may be allowed and the same direction which has been issued in the case of Mohan Lal Sharma may be issued in the present case also. The learned Single Judge of this Court allowed the writ petition of Mohan Lal and others Versus State of Rajasthan and other connected 18 writ petitions and passed the following directions: 2 “29. After having closely scrutinised the material on record, I do not find any justifiable criterion to draw the line between those who retired earlier and those retired after October 1, 1987. Both such set of employees were equally placed in the Municipalities of the State of Rajasthan. All the employees who got retired prior to October 1, 1987 had served the Municipalities for a very long period and they had earned earlier legitimate expectation. It is not something that they seek as a begging bowl. In my considered opinion the employees for the purpose of receiving pension form a class and there is no criterion on which classification of employees retiring prior to October 1, 1987 and retiring subsequent to that date can provide a rational principle correlated to the object underlying payment of pension. The eligibility criteria devised by Rules 3 and 4 of 1989 Rules being thoroughly arbitrary violates Article 14 and is struck down with the specification that 1989 Rules shall be applicable to all retired municipal employees irrespective of their date of retirement. In other words the employees who got retired prior to October 1, 1987 shall also be entitled to pensionary benefits. 30. For the reasons aforementioned all the writ petitions stand allowed and the respondents are directed to accord the pensionary benefits to all the petitioners after adjusting the contribution of Provident Fund paid to them, from the arrears of pension. The pensionary benefits shall be calculated from the date of retirement of each employee under the provisions of 1989 Rules alongwith the benefit of commutation of pension and other consequential reliefs. The parties shall bear their own costs.” In view of above and as agreed by both the parties, the present writ petition is 3 allowed and the same directions which have been issued in the case of Mohan Lal Versus State, as quoted above, are issued in this writ petition also. The cost is made easy. (NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN), J. DK