Thursday, 14, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Smt. Meenu Saini vs The State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 4319 Raj

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 4319 Raj
Judgement Date : 9 May, 2023

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Smt. Meenu Saini vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 9 May, 2023
Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur

[2023/RJJD/014189]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3518/2023

1. Smt. Meenu Saini D/o Shri Balbir Saini, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Bada Bass, Near Iti, Kotputli, Jaipur, Raj.

2. Ramswropp Chauhan S/o Shri Prabhati Lal, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Village Guhala, Tehsile Neem Ka Thana, Dist. Sikar (Raj.).

----Petitioners Versus

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

2. The Secretary To The Government And Commissioner, Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department, Secretariat, Jaipur.

3. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Jhunjhunu.

4. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Jaipur.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vinod Jhajharia through VC

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Order

09/05/2023

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, petitioners'

case is squarely covered by judgment rendered in the case of

Babu Lal Meena & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (SBCWP

No.144/2015) decided on 01.09.2015, particularly in relation to

his entitlement for notional benefits as contained in direction No.3

of the judgment aforesaid.

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

the petitioner to file a detailed representation seeking notional

[2023/RJJD/014189] (2 of 2) [CW-3518/2023]

benefits in light of judgement of Babu Lal Meena (supra), within a

period of two weeks.

In case, representation aforesaid is filed, the respondents

shall consider the same and confer the benefits to the petitioner in

accordance with law, preferably within a period of eight weeks of

receipt of the representation.

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.

The stay application also stands disposed of accordingly.

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J 40-SanjayS/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter