##PAGE1##

[2026:RJ-JP:39247-DB]

REPORTABLE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR Judgment reserved on: 23/09/2026 Judgment delivered on: 03/10/2026 Judgment (Full) uploaded on: 03/10/2026 (1) D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 212/2017 CNR: RJHC020832612017 | URN: SAW / 356U / 2017 H. K. Meena Son Of Late Ram Pratap Meena, aged about 59 years, R/o 154, Nandpuri, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur Rajasthan ----Appellant Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan Through Its Principal Secretary (Finance), Government Secretariat, C-Scheme, Jaipur

2. The Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Karbhawan-

Prithviraj Road, Jaipur - Rajasthan ----Respondents Connected With (2)D.B. Civil Special Appeal Writ No. 279/2017 CNR: RJHC020832772017 | URN: SAW / 496U / 2017

1. The State Of Rajasthan Represented Through Principal Secretary (Finance), Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur

2. The Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Kar Bhawan, Prathviraj Road, Jaipur.

----Appellants Versus H. K. Meena Son Of Late Ram Pratap Meena, aged about 60 years, R/o 154, Nandpuri, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur Rajasthan ----Respondent For Appellant(s) : Mr. Ajatshatru Mina with Mr. Himanshu Kala, Mr. Movil Jeenwal, Mr. Nrip Raj Singh, Mr. Rajat Choudhary &

Mr. Rhytham Shrimal in DBSAW No.212/2017 Mr. Vigyan Shah, AAG assisted by Ms. Monisha Agarwal &

Mr. Pulkit Bhardwaj in DBSAW No.279/2017 For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vigyan Shah, AAG assisted by Ms. Monisha Agarwal &

Mr. Pulkit Bhardwaj in DBSAW No.212/2017 Mr. Ajatshatru Mina with Mr. Himanshu Kala, Mr Movil Jeenwal, Mr. Nrip Raj Singh, Mr. Rajat Choudhary &

Mr. Rhytham Shrimal in DBSAW No.279/2017 DIVISION BENCH HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJAY K. AGRAWAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH C.A.V. JUDGMENT Sanjay K. Agrawal, CJ:

1. Since, the above said two appeals arise out of a common order dated 25.01.2017 and involve common & interconnected questions concerning the validity of voluntary retirement and directions for reinstatement and consequential benefits, they have been clubbed together, heard together and are being disposed of by this common order, as the writ petitioner and the State of Rajasthan, both have questioned the legality, validity and correctness of the impugned order dated 25.01.2017.

2. The aforesaid challenge has been made on the following factual background:

(i) The original writ petitioner H.K. Meena was initially appointed on the post of Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer in the Commercial Taxes Department, Government of Rajasthan. In the natural course of service, the writ petitioner would have superannuated on 31.07.2017, however on 17.10.2013, he applied for voluntary retirement pursuant to Rule 50(1) of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1996 (hereinafter called as ‘the Rules of 1996’) on account of ill health, to be effective from

14.01.2014.

(ii) The respondent forwarded the application of the writ petitioner to the concerned department. The writ petitioner was informed that no departmental enquiry is pending against him, however his application seeking voluntary retirement was rejected by the State Government on 13.01.2014 on the ground that it did not complete the mandatory 90 days notice period.

(iii) Thereafter, on 09.04.2014 the writ petitioner again submitted an application seeking voluntary retirement, to be effective from 31.07.2014, to which the respondent-State Government informed the writ petitioner on 28.04.2014 that a minor penalty in an enquiry under Rule 17 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1958 (hereinafter called as ‘the Rules of 1958’) is pending against him.

(iv) On 23.07.2014, the writ petitioner submitted an application seeking extension of the date of his intended voluntary retirement from 31.07.2014 to 31.10.2014. The said application came to be accepted by the respondents extending the services of the writ petitioner upto 31.10.2014.

(v) On 29.10.2014, the writ petitioner again moved an application with a request