Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Ajay Kumar Prajapat vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:26598) on 28 May, 2025
Author: Rekha Borana
Bench: Rekha Borana
[2025:RJ-JD:26598]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9264/2025
1. Ajay Kumar Prajapat S/o Shri Jai Narayan Prajapat, Aged
About 27 Years, R/o 196, Q Road Bhupalpura, Udaipur.
2. Deepak Prajapat S/o Shri Ram Chandra Prajapat, Aged
About 28 Years, R/o Bedla Teliwara Chauraha, Bedla
Badgaw, Udaipur.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary,
Medical And Health Services, Government Secretariat,
Jaipur.
2. Director (Public Health), Mukhyamantri Nishulk Jach
Yojna, Medical And Health Department, Swasthya
Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C Scheme, Jaipur.
3. Director (Non-Gazetted), Medical, Health And Family
Welfare Department, Swasthya Bhawan, Rajasthan,
Jaipur.
4. The Director, State Institute Of Health And Family Welfare
(Sihfw), Jhlana Doongi Colony, Ghat Ki Guni, Jaipur.
5. The Principal, Rnt Medical College, Udaipur.
6. Principal And Controller, Government Medical College,
Dungarpur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Himanshu Kaushik for
Mr. D.S. Sodha.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Tanuj Jain for
Mr. Mukesh Dave, AGC.
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA
Order
28/05/2025
1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
controversy in question rests covered by the judgment of a Co-
[2025:RJ-JD:26598] (2 of 3) [CW-9264/2025]
Ordinate Bench of this Court passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition
No.10256/2024; Arjun Sain vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.
(decided on 27.09.2024).
2. Counsel submits that the petitioners would be satisfied if the
respondents are directed to decide the representation as filed by
the petitioners in light of the aforesaid judgment.
3. Learned counsel for the respondents is not in a position to
refute the above submission. However, he submits that if the
petitioners file a representation, the respondent-authorities would
definitely consider and decide the same in accordance with the
case of Arjun Sain (supra) and if they are found to be covered
by the said judgment, appropriate relief would be granted to
them.
4. In view of the submissions made, the present writ petition is
disposed of with a direction to the competent Authority/
respondent-Department to decide the representation of the
petitioners if filed within a period of fifteen days from now. The
representation be decided within a period of six weeks thereafter
in accordance with law and keeping in view the observations made
in the case of Arjun Sain (supra).
5. 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.
6. The order has been passed based on the submissions made
in the petition and by learned counsel for the petitioners before
this Court. The respondents would be free to examine the veracity
of the submissions made in the petition and only in case, the
[2025:RJ-JD:26598] (3 of 3) [CW-9264/2025]
averments made therein are found to be correct, appropriate
orders would be passed in favour of the petitioners.
7. Stay petition and pending applications, if any, stand
disposed of.
(REKHA BORANA),J
62-KashishS/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
