Jasveer Kumar vs The State Of Rajasthan
2023 Latest Caselaw 271 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 443/2023

1. Jasveer Kumar S/o Milkhi Ram, Aged About 36 Years, R/o 6-H, Ganganagar, District Sri Ganganagar (Rajasthan). Worked As Computer Operator (Man With Machine) At Gram Panchayat 6-P, Panchayat Samiti Gharsana, District Sri Ganganagar.

2. Gopi Chand S/o Jugata Ram, Aged About 40 Years, Resident Of Village 8 Mld (A), Post 7 Mld, Tehsil Gharsana, District Sri Ganganagar (Rajasthan). Working As Computer Operator (Man With Machine) At Gram Panchayat 17 M.d., Panchayat Samiti Gharsana, District Sri Ganganagar.

----Petitioners Versus

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

2. The Commissioner, National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme, Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

3. The District Collector - Cum - District Project Coordinator, Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme, Sri Ganganagar.

4. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Sri Ganganagar.

5. The Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Gharsana, District Sri Ganganagar.

                                                                    ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)          :     Mr. Pawan Singh



                      JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

                                      Order

09/01/2023

1. Mr. Pawan Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners submits

that the controversy involved in the present writ petition is

(2 of 2) [CW-443/2023]

identical to one involved in the bunch of cases led by SB Civil

Writ Petition No.6338/2022 : Hari Singh & Ors. Vs. State of

Rajasthan & Ors.

2. Learned counsel submitted that though the petitioner has

submitted a representation to the competent authority on

27.09.2022 and an opinion was sought by the Chief Executive

Officer on 18.10.2022 but needful has not been done by the

respondents.

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

the petitioner to file a fresh representation within a period of three

weeks along with photo-stat copy of earlier representation; web

copy of judgment rendered in the case of Hari Singh (supra) and

certified copy of the order instant.

3. In case, a representation is so addressed within the aforesaid

period, the competent authority of respondents shall consider and

decide the same in accordance with law as early as possible,

preferably within a period of three months.

4. 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.

5. The stay application also stands disposed of accordingly.

(DINESH MEHTA),J 276-A.Arora/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)