RAM SINGH BHATI Vs. STATE & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since identical controversy has been involved herein, hence both the petitions were heard together at joint request, and are being decided by present order.

(2.) Both these petitions have been filed with the grievance that services which they have rendered prior to 20/10/1978 have not been computed for purposes of pensionary and other reitral dues as admissible under Rajasthan Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee Service (Pension) Rules, 1995 ("Rules, 1995").

(3.) Counsel submits that this controversy has been examined by this Court while vires of sub-rule(2) of R.10 of Rules, 1995 were challenged in Om Prakash Bansal v. State (CWP-2072/2001 decided vide judgment dt. 12/05/2004 = 2004 (3) WLC 512) - against which special appeal preferred has also been dismissed while affirming the judgment (supra) in Special Appeal-496/2004 vide judgment dt. 27/09/05).