Praveen Kumar Chawala vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 16813 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15659/2021

Praveen Kumar Chawala S/o Krishan Lal Chawala, Aged About 46 Years, Yadav Colony, Sri Vijaynagar District Sri Ganganagar (Raj.).

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department Of Rural Development And Panchayati Raj, Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

2. The Additional Commissioner Cum Joint Secretary, Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

3. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Hanumangarh (Raj.).

4. The Vikas Adhikari, Panchayat Samiti Pilibanga District Hanumangarh.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. J.S. Bhaleria.

For Respondent(s)         :



             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI

                                     Order

11/11/2021

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the

issue raised in the present writ petition is squarely covered by

judgment in Ranveer Soni v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. : S.B. Civil

Writ Petition No.8860/2021, decided on 15.07.2021 (Annex.P/6

filed with the writ petition) and submits that case of the petitioner

is identical to that of Ranveer Soni (supra).

In the case of Ranveer Soni (supra), a Co-ordinate Bench of

this Court referring to the judgment in Sardar Mal v. State of

(2 of 2) [CW-15659/2021]

Rajasthan & Ors. : S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9772/2011, decided

on 07.08.2012 and Man Singh Hada & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan

& Anr. : S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8124/2012, decided on

28.01.2014 alongwith Brij Lal Bundel v. State of Rajasthan & Anr.

: 2007(1) RLW 484, inter-alia, directed as under :-

"In view of the limited prayer addressed; the instant writ proceedings are closed with a direction to the petitioner to address a comprehensive representation within two weeks hereinafter, enclosing a copy of the judgment, which has been referred to and relied upon in support of his claim.

In case, a representation is so addressed within the aforesaid period, the State-respondents are directed to consider and decide the same by a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, however, in no case later than three months from the date of receipt of the representation alongwith a certified copy of this order.

Upon consideration of the representation so filed, if respondents find the case of the petitioner to be covered by the judgment(s) aforesaid, before giving actual benefits, an undertaking shall be procured from the petitioner to the effect that his rights/entitlements shall be subservient to the fate of the judgment(s) aforesaid and in case the same is reversed or modified in any manner, he shall also be liable for restitution of any benefits/emoluments so received.

With the observations and directions, as indicated above, the writ petition stands disposed of.

The stay application is also disposed of."

In view of the submissions made, the writ petition filed by

the petitioner is disposed of with the directions as given by a Co-

ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Ranveer Soni (supra).

(ARUN BHANSALI),J

58-Rmathur/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)