Rajasthan High Court
CW/23330/2018 of RAMESH CHANDRA SHARMA S/O SH. RAM NIWAS SHARMA Vs NATIONAL SEED CORPORATION LIMITED on 2 September 2026
JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 23330/2018 CNR: RJHC020988352018 | URN: CW / 39378U / 2018 Ramesh Chandra Sharma S/o Sh. Ram Niwas Sharma, Aged About 62 Years, Ex. Horticulture Officer, Resident Of 276/13 B, L.i.g. Aavas Vikas Colony, Sikandra, Agra (U.p.)
[2026:RJ-JP:35449]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 23330/2018
CNR: RJHC020988352018 | URN: CW / 39378U / 2018
Ramesh Chandra Sharma S/o Sh. Ram Niwas Sharma, Aged About 62 Years, Ex. Horticulture Officer, Resident Of 276/13 B,
L.i.g. Aavas Vikas Colony, Sikandra, Agra (U.p.)
----Petitioner
Versus
1.
National Seed Corporation Limited, (A Government Of India Undertaking) Through Its Chairman, Office At Beej Bhawan, Pusa Complex, New Delhi, 110012
2.
The Director, Central State Farm, Sardargarh District, Ganganagar, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s)
:
Mr. H. R. Kumawat, Adv.
For Respondent(s)
:
Ms. Priyanshi Jaiswal, Adv. for
Mr. Sandeep Singh Shekhawat, Adv.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Order
02/09/2026
1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for seeking a direction against the respondents to issue revised Form No.16 for the year 2015-2016.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner retired on attaining the age of superannuation w.e.f. 29.02.2016, however, just before retirement, petitioner was on leave and for such leave period although salary was not paid to the petitioner, yet in respect of unpaid salary tax was illegally deducted by the
[2026:RJ-JP:35449] (2 of 2) [CW-23330/2018] respondents and accordingly, after deduction Form No.16 was issued to the petitioner.
3. Learned counsel submits that under these circumstances, petitioner is entitled for revised Form No.16 so that he can claim the benefit from the Income Tax Department.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that admittedly, tax so deducted by the respondent-department has already been deposited with Income Tax Department. Form No.16 once drawn and issued cannot be revised by the respondent- department at its own and in case, the petitioner is aggrieved by illegal deduction of tax, he can avail the remedies before Income Tax Department.
5. This Court finds that in the instant writ petition, Income Tax Department has not been impleaded as party to the writ petition. Under these circumstances, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that liberty may be granted to the petitioner to seek redressal of his grievances with the concerned department by way of filing representation.
6. In view of above, this Court deems it just and proper to dispose of this writ petition by granting liberty to the petitioner to submit a representation before the Competent Authority in accordance with law. The Competent Authority is expected to decide the same after examining the relevant provision and to pass speaking order thereupon.
7. Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of. (ANAND SHARMA),J 33/Jatin