Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 5690 Raj
Judgement Date : 29 January, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:5719]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1808/2025
Anil Kumar Gautam S/o Rajpal Gautam, Aged About 59 Years, R/
o Sant Vinoba Nagar, Jalesar Road, Near By Veterinary Hospital,
Sadabaad, District Mathura, Uttar Pradesh.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary,
Department Of Rural Development And Panchayati Raj,
Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. Chief Executive Officer, Jila Parishad, Sirohi.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jitendra Mohan Choudhary.
For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA
Order
29/01/2025
1. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner states that
the issue raised in the present writ petition is covered by a
judgment rendered by Division Bench of this Court in Dr. (Smt.)
Pushpa Mehta Vs. Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate
Tribunal & Ors. Reported in 2001(1) RLR 398. He submits
that the petitioner is sanguine that, in case he is allowed to file a
representation qua the grievance raised in the present writ
petition and the same is considered in light of the aforesaid
judgment, he will be meted out with favorable treatment.
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
[2025:RJ-JD:5719] (2 of 2) [CW-1808/2025]
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. In
case, judgment ibid is not applicable to the petitioner's case,
specific reasons thereof would be given by passing a speaking
order as expeditiously as possible within a period of 30 days from
the date petitioner approaches the competent authority with a
webprint of the instant order.
6. Until the representation of the petitioner is decided, effect
and operation of the order dated 15.01.2025 (Annex.2), qua the
petitioner, shall remain stayed.
7. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.
(ARUN MONGA),J 311-Sumit/Jitender/-
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!