Anju vs The State Of Rajasthan ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 9196 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Anju vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 21 October, 2024

Author: Vinit Kumar Mathur

Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur

[2024:RJ-JD:42954]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17476/2024

1.       Anju W/o Ramesh Kumar, Aged About 45 Years, R/o
         Harijan Basti, Mehtar Dharmshala Ke Pass, Ward No. 30,
         Ratangarh, District Churu.
2.       Pooja W/o Anand Kumar, Aged About 30 Years, R/o 1
         Ward No. 30, Harijan Basti, Ratangarh, District Churu.
                                                                      ----Petitioners
                                       Versus
1.       The    State      Of     Rajasthan,         Through        The   Secretary,
         Department Of Local Self Government, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2.       Executive Officer, Municipal Board, Ratangarh, District
         Churu, Rajasthan.
                                                                    ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)            :     Mr. Sanjay Raj Pandit.



         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Order

21/10/2024

1. Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to

withdraw the present petition in light of the directions given by the

Division Bench of this Court vide its order dated 09.08.2019

rendered in D.B. Special Appeal No.1733/2018 : Virendra

Kumar & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.

2. Permission granted.

3. The present petition is permitted to be withdrawn.

4. The petitioners would be free to file a representation before

the respondents within a period of two weeks from today.

5. In case, the representation is so addressed along with a

certified copy of the order instant, the respondents shall consider

petitioner's grievance in accordance with law including the

[2024:RJ-JD:42954] (2 of 2) [CW-17476/2024]

judgment passed by Division Bench in the case of Virendra

Kumar (supra).

6. 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.

7. The writ petition so also the stay application stand dismissed

accordingly.

8. 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

petitioners would be entitled to the relief.

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J 60-Shahenshah/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)