Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Anita Meena vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:35264) on 8 August, 2025
Author: Nupur Bhati
Bench: Nupur Bhati
[2025:RJ-JD:35264]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15254/2025
1. Anita Meena D/o Ram Dayal Meena W/o Abhishek, Aged
About 32 Years, R/o Danalpur, District Karauli.
2. Kali Meena D/o Rameshvar Dayal Meena W/o Mukesh
Kumar Meena, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Toda Nagar,
Alwar.
3. Nirmala Kumari D/o Tara Chand W/o Kailash Chand, Aged
About 33 Years, R/o Gurha Kalan, Post Gudha Chhota,
Rajpura, District Siar.
4. Ramkunwar Sangwa S/o Narayan Ram Sangwa, Aged
About 43 Years, R/o Vpo Tarnau, Tehsil Jayal, District
Nagaur.
5. Lovely Arora D/o Pram Prakash Arora, Aged About 37
Years, R/o Ward No. 23, House No. 43, Purani
Dhanmandi, Raisingh Nagar, District Sri Ganganagar.
6. Karamjeet Kaur D/o Sawran Singh W/o Harjinder Singh,
Aged About 41 Years, R/o Vpo 16 Rb, Tehsil
Raisinghnagar, District Sri Ganganagar.
7. Bhanwar Lal Daroga S/o Purna Ram Daroga, Aged About
50 Years, R/o Vpo Gorau, Via Nimbi Jodha, Tehsil Jayal,
District Nagaur.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary,
Department Of Rural Development And Panchayati Raj
(Panchayati Raj), Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur,
Rajasthan.
2. Additional Commissioner, Rural Development And
Panchayati Raj Department, Government Of Rajasthan,
Jaipur.
3. District Programme Coordinator And District Collector,
Nagaur, Rajasthan.
4. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Nagaur, Rajasthan.
5. Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Makrana, District
Nagaur (Now Deedwana-Kuchaman), Rajasthan.
6. Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Jayal, District
Nagaur, Rajasthan.
(Downloaded on 08/08/2025 at 07:56:18 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:35264] (2 of 3) [CW-15254/2025]
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pawan Singh
Mr. Mahendra Kumar Gurjar
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI
Order
08/08/2025
1. Petition herein arises, inter alia, out of the inaction on the
part of the respondents in not according the correct service and
notional benefits to the petitioners.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners at the outset submits that
qua the aforesaid grievance, the petitioners may be granted
liberty to file a fresh representation before the competent
authority and the same be decided by passing appropriate
administrative orders, in accordance with law.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners also relies on
order/judgment in Nand Kishore Sharma & Ors. v. The State
of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B. Civil Writ Petition
No.12109/2018, decided on 18.07.2018 at Jaipur Bench and
submits that the respondents may be directed to consider the
representation of the petitioners in light of the aforesaid
judgment.
4. Request seems to be fair.
5. 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.
[2025:RJ-JD:35264] (3 of 3) [CW-15254/2025]
6. In the aforesaid premise, 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.
7. 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.
8. Needful be done as expeditiously as possible.
(DR.NUPUR BHATI),J
surabhii/223-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
