ORDER :

Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J.

1. In wake of instant surge in COVID-19 cases and spread of its highly infectious Omicron variant, the lawyers have been advised to refrain from coming to the Courts.

2. Counsel for the petitioners have drawn attention of this Court to the order passed by this Court in Ramji Lal Kulhari v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 85/2020), decided on 10.01.2022 and counsel for the petitioners seek direction/relief as granted in the case of Ramji Lal Kulhari (supra).

3. In view of the submissions made, the writ petitions filed by the petitioner is dismissed. The order of Ramji Lal Kulhari (supra), reads as follows:-

"In wake of instant surge in COVID-19 cases and spread of its highly infectious Omicron variant, the lawyers have been advised to refrain from coming to the Courts.

Since the controversy involved in all these writ petitions is common, thus, are decided by a common order; Ramji Lal Kulhari being the lead case.

The petitioners have preferred these writ petitions, in sum and substance, for the following reliefs:-

SBCWP No. 85/2020:

"To issue an appropriate writ and direct the respondents to grant one notional increment to the petitioner with effect from 1.7.2019, on rendering 12 months service and re-fix his pension taking into account the same and revise all his pensionary benefits and make payments of the consequential arrears thereof, along with interest as per mandatory provisions for grant of interest on delayed payment of retiral benefits, under Rule 89 of RSR. Any adverse order, if passed, on the pending notice for demand of justice may also be quashed."

The factual matrix of case in brief is that the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Vehicle Driver on 5.8.1996 and posted in Prathmic Health Centre at Bhansali (Rajgarh). His date of birth being 10.06.1959. The petitioner retired from service on 30.6.2019 vide order dated 28.6.2019.

The bone of contention is Rule 14 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as the "Rules of 2008") and Rule 13 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the "Rules of 2017"). The petitioner is seeking implementation of retiral benefits as on 01.07.2019.

Counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention of this Court to order dated on 30.07.2021 passed by Hon'ble Orissa High Court in Arun Kumar Biswal v. State of Odisha and Ors., reported in, relevant paras whereof are reads as follows:-

"13. In the above order of the Madras High Court, it was held that as the petitioner therein had completed one full year service as on 30.06.2013, but the increment fell due on 01.07.2013, on which date he was not in service, though the date of increment fell due on the next date of his retirement, the petitioner would be given one notional increment for the period from 01.07.2012 to 30.06.2013, as he had completed full one year of service, for the purpose of pensionary benefits and not for any other purpose. The said order of the Madras High Court was challenged in SLP(C) Diary No(s). 22283 of 2018 and the apex Court dismissed the said SLP preferred by the Union of India and upheld the order of the Madras High Court in P. Ayyamperumal (supra). Although a review petition was filed by the Union of India bearing R.P.(C) No.1731 of 2019, the same was dismissed vide order dated 08.08.2019. Thereby, the order of the Madras High Court has reached its finality by dismissal of the SLP as well as the review petition preferred by the Union of India.

14. Similarly, in the case of Yogendra Singh Bhadauria, mentioned supra, Madhya Pradesh High Court, by applying the ratio decided in P. Ayyamperumal (supra), directed as follows:-

"(i) The official respondents are directed to release the increment due to the appellants w.e.f. 01.07.2014, 01.07.2010, 01.07.2013, 01.07.2012, 01.07.2015 and 01.07.2015 respectively.

(ii) The pension be refixed after adding the grant of aforesaid increment an