Harish Kumar Damor vs The State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 8324 Raj

[2023:RJ-JD:34197] (1 of 3) [CW-15799/2023]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15799/2023

1. Harish Kumar Damor S/o Thanwar Chand Damor, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Village - Rel Post Bawalwara, Kherwara, District Udaipur At Presently Posting At Chc Bawalwara, Block Kherwara, District Udaipur.

2. Jay Kishan Rawal S/o Sohan Lal Rawal, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Jain Mandir Ke Pass, Tokar, Tehsil Semari, District Udaipur At Presently Posting At Phc Jawas, Block Kherwara, District Udaipur.

3. Kapil Kumar Jain S/o Roshan Lal Jain, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Ganesh Colony, Badla District Udaipur, Raj At Presently Posting At Phc Khandi Obri, Block Kherwara, District Udaipur.

4. Vinod Kumar Prajapat S/o Kanhaiya Lal Prajapat, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Vpo Sulai, Kherwara, District Udaipur At Presently Posting At Phc Sulai, Block Kherwara, District Udaipur.

5. Vishnu Kumar Dabhee S/o Shanker Lal Bunker, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Village Kanpur, Post Patiya Nayagaon, District Udaipur At Presently Posting At Phc Balicha, Block Kherwara, District Udaipur.

6. Rahul Meghwal S/o Shankar Lal Meghwal, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Kalalwada, Sarera, Nayagaon, District Udaipur At Presently Posting At Phc Nayagaon, Block Kherwara, District Udaipur.

7. Yogesh Kumar Bhil S/o Govindram Bhil, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Village Parmarwada Post Deri, Tehsil Nayagaon, District Udaipur At Present Posting At Phc Pahada, Block Kherwara, District Udaipur.

8. Rohit Kumar Bhil S/o Rewa Lal, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Pandor Fala, Juwarwa, Patiya, Nayagaon, District Udaipur At Present Posting At Phc Dabaycha, Block Kherwara, District Udaipur.

9. Rajesh Kumar Kalal S/o Ashok, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Vpo Kanbal, Kherwara, District Udaipur At Presently Posting At Phc Kanbai, Block Kherwara, District Udaipur.

10. Sumit Parmar S/o Babu Lal Parmar, Aged About 32 Years,

[2023:RJ-JD:34197] (2 of 3) [CW-15799/2023]

R/o Village - Jhunthri, Kherwara, District Udaipur At Presently Posting At Chc Chani, Block Kherwara, District Udaipur.

11. Neeraj Tirgar S/o Heera Lal Tirgar, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Trigar Bast Road, Tirgar Basti, Pahara, Nayagaon, District Udaipur At Presently Posting At Phc Sarera, Block Kherwara, District Udaipur.

----Petitioners Versus

1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Medical And Health Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. Director, (Public Health) Medical And Health Service, Rajasthan, Swasthya Bhawan, Tilak Marg, Jaipur.

3. Joint Secretary, Finance Department, Government Of Rajasthan Secretariat, Jaipur.

4. Rajasthan Medical Service Corporation Department, Through Its Chairman / Managing Director, Gandhi Block, Swasthya Bhawan Tilak Marg, C Scheme, Jaipur.

5. Nodal Officer, Mndy/mnjy, Medical And Health Services, Rajasthan, Swasthya Bhawan, Tilak Marg, Jaipur.

6. Chief Medical And Health Officer, Udaipur, Raj.

7. Block Chief Medical And Health Officer, Kherwara, District Udaipur, Rajasthan.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Tanwar Singh Rathore

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Order

10/10/2023

1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners

would feel satisfied if a direction is issued to consider their

representation in the light of judgment dated 20.03.2017

rendered by this Court in a bunch of writ petitions led by Pankaj

[2023:RJ-JD:34197] (3 of 3) [CW-15799/2023]

Kumar Upadhyay & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B.

Civil Writ Petition No. 953/2017.

2. In view of the aforesaid, the present writ petition is disposed of

with a direction to the petitioners to file the representation within

a period of four weeks from today.

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

period, the respondents shall consider and decide the same in

accordance with law including the law laid down by this Court in

the case of Pankaj Kumar Upadhyay (supra); however, in no case

later than six weeks from the date of receipt of the representation.

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

representation has been issued only with a view to ensure

expeditious redressal of petitioners' 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.

6. The order has been passed based on the submissions made in

the petition, the respondents would be free to examine the

veracity of the submissions made in the petition and only in case,

the averments made therein are found to be correct, the petitioner

would be entitled to the relief.

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J 311-Anil Singh/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)