DBSAW NO.478/08. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. O R D E R D.B. CIVIL SPECIAL APPEAL (WRIT) NO.478/2008. In S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.4115/2005. State of Rajasthan Vs. Radhey Shyam Sharma Date of order:- September 12, 2008. PRESENT HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI NARAYAN ROY HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Mr. S.S. Sharma, Government Counsel for the appellant. Ms. Snehlata Sharma for the respondents. ***** BY THE COURT :- Heard counsel for the parties. 2) This State appeal is directed against the order dated 14/5/2007 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in its writ jurisdiction whereby and whereunder necessary directions were given to finalise pensionary benefits payable to the writ- petitioner with a cost of Rs.50,000/-. 3) Learned counsel for the appellant confines this appeal only as against the order of cost. 4) Necessary facts giving rise to writ application are as under:- Writ-petitioner initially was appointed as Gram Sewak under Panchayati Raj Department. Subsequently, he was shifted to Agriculture DBSAW NO.478/08. 2 Department in July, 1971. Again he was sent back to his parent department and was posted as Development Officer. He was put under suspension while working as Development Officer vide order dated 13/6/1980 in contemplation of enquiry under Rule 17 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1958. 5) The order of suspension and initiation of departmental proceedings however was challenged by the writ-petitioner in SBCWP No.40/1983. Same was allowed on 6/9/1990 with certain observations to the effect that writ-petitioner shall be deemed to be in services from the date of his suspension and he will be entitled for all his emoluments and attended benefits treating him to be in service till the date of his superannuation. Before passing of this order, the writ-petitioner superannuated w.e.f. 31/5/1988. When pensionary benefit as per earlier directions of this Court was not paid to him, he again approached this Court by filing writ application being SBCWP No.4115/2005. Same was disposed of on 14/5/2007 giving rise to this appeal. 6) The learned Single Judge of this Court having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, held that pensionary benefit was not paid to the writ-petitioner even counting his service from 1990 and this matter could not have been kept on hold for several years. In the background of the facts therefore, learned Single Judge directed the authorities to calculate the pensionary benefits payable to him keeping in view the age of the writ- DBSAW NO.478/08. 3 petitioner who at the time of disposal of writ application was 76 years old and also directed for payment of cost of Rs.50,000/-. 7) It is undisputed that pensionary benefit was withheld for more than 18 years and no satisfactory explanation/excuse was stated in the reply filed in the writ application by the respondent-State. The matter was kept on hold for several years and the writ-petitioner was deprived from the pensionary benefits. In our view, the learned single Judge of this Court was wholly justified in awarding the cost of Rs.50,000/-. 8) For the reasons aforementioned therefore, we do not find any justification to interfere with the order impugned in this appeal. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. (NARAYAN ROY), CJ. anil