Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Shri Nath Acharya vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:27292) on 17 June, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:27292]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11581/2025
1. Shri Nath Acharya S/o Jaiprakash Acharya, Aged About
38 Years, R/o Jawahar Hospital District Jaisalmer.
2. Dinesh Pareek S/o Ramniwas Pareek, Aged About 36
Years, At Present Working At Sub District Hospital
Kishangarh Renwal District Jaipur.
3. Prakash Chandra Bamaniya S/o Naniya Bamaniya, Aged
About 41 Years, At Present Working At Govt. Hospital
Sagwara Pmo District Dungarpur.
4. Murli Mohan Purohit S/o Jabar Singh, Aged About 40
Years, At Present Working At Jawahar Hospital District
Jaisalmer.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Medical And
Health Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. Secretary, Finance (Budget) Department, Government Of
Rajasthan, Jaipur.
3. Joint Secretary, Finance (Budget) Department,
Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
4. Director (Non-Gazetted), Department Of Medical And
Health Services, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
5. Director, (Public Health) Medical And Health Services,
Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
6. Additional Director, Medical And Health Services,
Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur, Jaipur.
7. Nodal Officer, Mndy, Medical And Health Services,
Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
8. Nodal Officer, Mnjy, Medical And Health Services,
Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
9. Rajasthan Medical Services Corporation Limites (Rmsc),
Department Of Medical And Health Services, Swasthya
Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur Through Its
Managing Director.
10. Managing Director, N.h.m. Swasthya Bhawan, Jaipur.
11. Chief Executive Officer, State Health Assurance Agency,
(Downloaded on 17/06/2025 at 09:38:07 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:27292] (2 of 3) [CW-11581/2025]
Jaipur.
12. Principal Medical Officer, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
13. Principal Medical Officer, Dungarpur, Rajasthan.
14. Principal Medical Officer, Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
15. Chief Medical And Health Officer, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
16. Chief Medical And Health Officer, Dungarpur, Rajasthan.
17. Chief Medical And Health Officer, Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
18. Rajasthan Medical Relief Society, Jaipur, Through
Secretary, District Jaipur, Rajasthan.
19. Rajasthan Medical Relief Society, Dungarpur, Through
Secretary, District, Dungarpur, Rajasthan.
20. Rajasthan Medical Relief Society, Jaisalmer, Through
Secretary, District Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. S.K. Verma
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Narendra Singh Rajpurohit, AAG
with Mr. Sher Singh Rathore
Mr. Mukesh Dave with
Mr. Tanuj Jain
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SHRIMALI
(VACATION JUDGE)
Order
17/06/2025
1. While asserting that the petitioners' case is covered by the
judgment dated 19.01.2021 passed by this Court in the case of
Jai Prakash Ghanchi & Ors. vs.State of Rajasthan & Ors.
(S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7273/2020), learned counsel for
the petitioners submitted that the petitioners would be satisfied if
the competent authority of the respondents is directed to consider
petitioners' representation (which they would be filing within a
period of four weeks from today) in accordance with law in light of
[2025:RJ-JD:27292] (3 of 3) [CW-11581/2025]
the judgment passed in the case of Jai Prakash Ghanchi (supra) so
also in the light of Circular dated 02.09.2020.
2. The writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the
petitioners 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 Ghanchi (supra) and certified
copy of the order instant within a period of four weeks from today.
3. In case, a representation is so addressed, the competent
authority of the respondents shall consider the same in
accordance with law including the judgment cited by the
petitioners, as early as possible, preferably within a period of eight
weeks of receipt thereof.
4. It is made clear that aforesaid direction to decide the
representation has been issued only with a view to ensure
expeditious redressal of petitioners' 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.
(CHANDRA PRAKASH SHRIMALI),VJ
201-Hanuman/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
