Tej Singh vs The State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 14720 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15048/2022

Tej Singh S/o Gyan Singh, Aged About 62 Years, 11/205, M.p. Colony, Bikaner (Raj.).

----Petitioner Versus

1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Public Health Engineering Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur (Raj.).

2. The Chief Engineer (Rural), Public Health Engineering Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

3. The Superintending Engineer, Public Health Engineering Department, Circle Bikaner (Raj.).

                                                                ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)         :    Mr. M. S. Purohit
For Respondent(s)         :    Ms. Anjana Jawa



                    JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

                                    Order

14/12/2022

1. After arguing for some time, Mr. Purohit, learned counsel for

the petitioner submits that the petitioner would be satisfied if the

respondents are directed to consider his representation, which he

would be filing (within a period of 15 days from today) in the light

of judgment rendered by this Court in Sohan Lal Mathur Vs. State

of Rajasthan (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3631/2008), decided on

17.11.2008, which has subsequently been confirmed up till the

Hon'ble Apex Court in SLP No.14932/2012.

2. The writ petition is, therefore, disposed of with a direction to

the petitioner to file representation indicating the pay scale which

he claims along with a copy of the judgment dated 17.11.2018

(2 of 2) [CW-15048/2022]

rendered in the case of Sohan Lal Mathur (supra) and a certified

copy of the order instant within a period of two weeks from today.

3. If such representation is so addressed, the competent

authority shall consider the same and do the needful in

accordance with law within a period of eight weeks thereafter.

4. It is made clear that aforesaid direction to decide the

petitioner's 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.

5. Stay application too stands disposed of.

(DINESH MEHTA),J 37-A.Arora/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)