Dinesh @ Jeetmal Ninama vs State Of Rajasthan

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 9087 Raj
Judgement Date : 8 April, 2021

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Dinesh @ Jeetmal Ninama vs State Of Rajasthan on 8 April, 2021
Bench: Dinesh Mehta

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5886/2021 Dinesh @ Jeetmal Ninama S/o Shri Dhuliya Ninama, Aged About 29 Years, By Caste Bhil (S.t.), Resident Of Dungripada, Ward No. 4, Tehsil Pipalkhoot, District Pratapgarh. Presently Working As Cook In Govt. Ambedkar Boys Hostel, Pipalkhoot District Pratapgarh.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

2. The Director, Social Welfare Department, Jaipur.

3. The Assistant Director, Social Welfare Department, Pratapgarh.

                                                                   ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)           :     Mr. Mahipaal Rajpurohit
For Respondent(s)           :



                      JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

                                      Order

08/04/2021

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner would be satisfied if the respondents are directed to consider his case in light of judgment dated 06.03.2020 passed by this Court in SBCWP No.11802/2016 (Durga Ram vs. State & Ors).

2. Petitioner has further invited Court's attention towards orders dated 22.02.2016 and 18.09.2020 whereby benefits have already been given to candidates like the petitioner.

3. In view of the aforesaid, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to file a representation before the competent authority along with a certified copy of order (Downloaded on 08/04/2021 at 09:07:42 PM) (2 of 2) [CW-5886/2021] instant and photocopy/web copy of the judgment passed in the case of Durga Ram vs. State (supra) along with photo copy(ies) of other relevant documents within a period of three weeks from today.

4. On receipt of the representation, competent authority shall do the needful in accordance with law preferably within a period of twelve weeks of receipt thereof.

5. In case any of the petitioner's grievance persists, he/she shall be free to avail remedies available under law.

6. It is made clear that aforesaid direction to decide the representation has been issued only with a view to ensure expeditious redressal of petitioner's grievance. The same may not be construed to be an order to decide the representation in a particular manner.

7. The stay application also stands disposed of accordingly.

(DINESH MEHTA),J 134-pooja/-

(Downloaded on 08/04/2021 at 09:07:42 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)