Sonu Deora vs The State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 1315 Raj

[2023/RJJD/003871]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1235/2023

Sonu Deora D/o Late Shri Mithalal Jain, Aged About 29 Years, R/ o House No. 239, Kirti Nagar, Hudco Quarters, Magra Punjala, Jodhpur, Rajasthan.

----Petitioner Versus

1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Public Health And Engineering Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

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

3. The Superintendent Engineer, Public Health And Engineering Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

                                                                   ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)           :     Ms. Varsha Bissa
For Respondent(s)           :



                        JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

                                       Order

03/02/2023

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner

would feel satisfied, if respondents are directed to consider his

representation in the light of judgment dated 20.10.2022 in

DBCWP No.14345/2021 Prinyanka Shrimali vs. State of Rajasthan

& Ors expeditiously, in accordance with law.

2. In view of the submission made by counsel for the petitioner,

this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner

for filing representation before the competent authority.

[2023/RJJD/003871] (2 of 2) [CW-1235/2023]

3. The present writ petition is, therefore, disposed of with the

direction to the petitioner to address a fresh representation before

the competent authority of the respondents within a period of

eight weeks along with photostat copy of the earlier

representation and a certified copy of the order instant.

4. In case representation is so addressed, the competent

authority shall consider the same, in accordance with law, as early

as possible, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the

receipt thereof.

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 217-Taruna/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)