Narendra Kumar Sharma vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 7033 Raj

[2023:RJ-JD:28919]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3341/2021

Narendra Kumar Sharma S/o Ramchandra Sharma, Aged About 57 Years, Hospital Road, Deogarh, Rajsamand (Raj.).

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of Secondary Education, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

2. The Director, Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.

3. The Chief District Education Officer (Secondary Education), Rajsamand.

4. The Deputy Director (Secondary), Udaipur Division, Udaipur.

5. The Joint Director (Secondary School Education), Udaipur Division, Udaipur.

                                                                  ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)          :    Mr. Harshil Vyas for Mr. Dinesh
                                Kumar Godara
For Respondent(s)          :    -



                         JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

                                     Order

11/09/2023

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

petitioner would feel satisfied, if respondents are directed to

consider his representation dated 21.12.2020, expeditiously, in

accordance with law in light of the judgment passed by the Jaipur

Bench of this Court in Kanwar Pal Singh & Ors. Vs. State of

Rajasthan & Anr. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1739/1999) decided

on 08.02.2018.

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

direction to the petitioner to address a fresh representation before

[2023:RJ-JD:28919] (2 of 2) [CW-3341/2021]

the competent authority of the respondents within a period of four

weeks along with photostat copy of the earlier representation and

a certified copy of the order instant.

3. In case representation is so addressed, the competent

authority shall consider the same, in accordance with law, while

taking into consideration the order passed in the case of Kanwar

Pal Singh (supra), as early as possible, preferably within a period

of three months from the receipt of the representation.

4. In case the respondents are of the view that the petitioner is

not entitled to the relief claimed, they shall pass a speaking order

under intimation to the petitioner, against which petitioner's right

to take remedy shall stand reserved.

5. 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.

6. The stay application also stands disposed of accordingly.

(DINESH MEHTA),J 155-Ramesh/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)