Sanjay Kumar Verma vs Rajasthan State Road Transport ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 2600 Raj

[2023/RJJD/007983]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 943/2023

Sanjay Kumar Verma S/o Shri Ramavatar Verma, Aged About 52 Years, R/o Anand Vihar Apani Dhani Hotel Ke Peeche, Harmada, Jaipur (Raj.).

----Petitioner Versus

1. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Through The Chairman Cum Managing Director, Chomu House, Jaipur (Raj.).

2. The Executive Director (Admn./traffic), Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Jaipur (Raj.).

3. The Chief Manager, Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Bikaner Depot, District Bikaner (Raj.).

4. The Chief Manager, Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Vaishali Nagar Depot, District Jaipur (Raj.).

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sunil Kumar Singodiya through VC

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Order

29/03/2023

1. Mr. Singodiya, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

the petitioner would feel satisfied, if the respondent-Corporation is

directed to consider petitioner's representation in light of the

Judgment dated 02.12.2021 rendered by the Division Bench of

this Court in D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 524/2018 (The

Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation & Anr. vs. Tara

Chand), expeditiously in accordance with law.

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

direction to the petitioner to address a representation before the

[2023/RJJD/007983] (2 of 2) [CW-943/2023]

competent authority of the respondent-Corporation along with

web copy of the judgment dated 02.12.2021 rendered in D.B.

Special Appeal Writ No. 524/2018 and the certified copy of the

order instant within a period of four weeks.

3. In case, the representation is so addressed, the competent

authority shall consider the same in accordance with law including

the Division Bench judgment dated 02.12.2021, as early as

possible, preferably within a period of three months from the

receipt thereof.

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.

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J 18-SanjayS/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)