Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 11147 Raj
Judgement Date : 4 April, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:17535]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7120/2025
1. Devendra Charan S/o Shri Sheshkaran Charan, Aged
About 24 Years, Village Charankheri, Post Jarkhana, Tehsil
Barisadari, Dist Chittorgarh.
2. Moomal Charan D/o Shri Ghanshyam Charan, Aged About
22 Years, R/o Village Dhandhlas Post Dhandhlas Jalap,
Tehsil Merta, Dist. Nagaur.
3. Saroj Devi D/o Shri Babu Lal, Aged About 22 Years, R/o
Village And Post Kanwariyat, Tehsil Merta, Dist Nagaur.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department
Of Rural And Panchayati Raj, Government Of Rajasthan,
Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. The Secretary, Department Of Education, Government Of
Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
3. The Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner.
4. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Chittorgarh.
5. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Ajmer.
6. The District Education Officer, (Headquarter), Elementary
Education, Chittorgarh.
7. The District Education Officer, Elementary Education,
Ajmer.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Khet Singh.
For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA
Order (Oral) 04/04/2025
1. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioners relies
on a judgment rendered in Omprakash & Ors. Vs. State of
Rajasthan & Ors.: SBCWP No.21214/2014, decided on
21.11.2017 by a Coordinate Bench of this Court at Jaipur and
[2025:RJ-JD:17535] (2 of 2) [CW-7120/2025]
states that instead of deciding the controversy afresh by this
Court, petitioners be permitted to file a fresh representation
before the competent authority and the competent authority be
directed to decided the same by passing appropriate order, in
accordance with law, keeping in view the aforesaid judgment.
2. Request seems to be fair.
3. Given the nature of order which is being passed, no
prejudice would be caused to the respondents and, therefore, the
requirement of issuance of notice is dispensed with as no return is
required to be filed by them.
4. In the aforesaid premise, without commenting on the merits
of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a liberty to the
petitioners to file a fresh representation, which shall be gone into
by the competent authority and appropriate administrative order
shall be passed in accordance with law.
5. Needless to say that the competent authority shall go
through the judgment relied upon by learned counsel for the
petitioners as mentioned hereinabove and apply its independent
mind on the applicability of the same before passing any order.
6. Needful be done as expeditiously as possible.
7. It is made clear that the direction to consider the
representation shall not be construed as an expression of any
opinion, in any manner.
(ARUN MONGA),J 5-Jitender/Sumit/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!