RAJASTHAN STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD Vs. NARAYAN LAL MEENA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE learned single Judge, while deciding the writ petition of the petitioner, passed the following order:

(2.) "hon'ble Shri A. K. Kathur. J. January 11, 1993. Shri M. L. Kala. Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri R. K. Singhal, Advocate, for the respondents.

(3.) MR. Singhal submits that the petitioner has already been granted relief of three-fourths of subsistence allowance during suspension. Now the grievance is regarding increment during suspension period. This court in the cases of Kan Singh v. State. (1992) 9 VVLR 882 (Raj), Ghanshyam Lal v. State. (1992) 5 WLR 751 (Raj), and Ram Babu Sharma v. State. (1992) 5 WLR 755 (Raj), has already taken the view that the incumbent during his suspension is entitled to the benefit of increment, Therefore the petitioner may also be given the increment during suspension period if it is due to him. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. "