Govind Kumar vs The State Of Rajasthan ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 3719 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Govind Kumar vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 3 January, 2025

Author: Dinesh Mehta

Bench: Dinesh Mehta

[2025:RJ-JD:416]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1827/2024

Govind Kumar S/o Shri Balu Ram, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Village Saroth, Tehsil Bheem, District Rajsamand (Raj.).

----Petitioner Versus

1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Medical And Health Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur (Raj.).

2. The Secretary, Finance (Budget), Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur (Raj.).

3. The Joint Secretary, Finance (Budget) Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur (Raj.).

4. The Director (Non-Gazetted), Department Of Medical And Health Services, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur (Raj.).

5. The Director (Public Health), Medical And Health Services, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur (Raj.).

6. The Additional Director, Medical And Health Services, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur (Raj.).

7. The Nodal Officer, Mndy, Medical And Health Services, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

8. The Rajasthan Medical Services Corporation Limited (Rmsc), Department Of Medical And Health Services, Swasthya Bahwan, Tilak Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur Through Its Managing Director, Jaipur (Raj.).

9. The Managing Director, Nhm, Swasthya Bhawan, Jaipur (Raj.).

10. The Chief Executive Officer, State Health Assurance Agency, Jaipur (Raj.).

11. The Chief Medical And Health Officer, Rajsamand (Raj.).

12. The Rajasthan Medical Relief Society, Rajsamand Through Its Secretary, District Rajsamand (Raj.).

13. The Medical Officer Incharge, Primary Health Centre, District Rajsamand (Raj.).

14. The Shubham Security, Beawar (Raj.) Through Its Proprietor Manager, Beawar (Raj.).

----Respondents

[2025:RJ-JD:416] (2 of 3) [CW-1827/2024]

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anil Bidan Halu For Respondent(s) : Mr. Awar Dan Ujjwal Mr. Tanuj Jain for Mr. Mukesh Dave

JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

Order

03/01/2025

1. While asserting that the petitioner's case is covered by the

judgment dated 19.01.2021 passed by co-ordinate Bench of this

Court in the case of Jai Prakash Ganchi & Ors. vs. State of

Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7273/2020),

learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner

would be satisfied if the competent authority of the respondents is

directed to consider petitioner's representation (which he would be

filing within a period of four weeks from today) in accordance with

law in light of the judgment passed in the case of Jai Prakash

Ganchi (supra) so also in light of the Circular dated 02.09.2020.

2. The writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the

petitioner to file a fresh representation alongwith requisite

documents and web-copy of the judgment dated 19.01.2021

passed in the case of Jai Prakash Ganchi (supra) and certified copy

of the order instant within a period of four weeks from today.

3. In case, a representation(s) is so addressed, the competent

authority of the respondents shall consider the same in

accordance with law in light of the judgment cited by the

petitioner, as early as possible, preferably within a period of eight

weeks of receipt thereof.

[2025:RJ-JD:416] (3 of 3) [CW-1827/2024]

4. 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.

5. The stay application also stands disposed of, accordingly.

(DINESH MEHTA),J 191-Mak/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)