Tuesday, 12, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Praveen Meena vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:45959)
2025 Latest Caselaw 14427 Raj

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 14427 Raj
Judgement Date : 17 October, 2025

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Praveen Meena vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:45959) on 17 October, 2025

Author: Nupur Bhati
Bench: Nupur Bhati
[2025:RJ-JD:45959]

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                        JODHPUR
                S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 20395/2025

Praveen Meena S/o Rameshwar Prasad Meena, Aged About 35
Years, R/o Meena Mohalla, Gadepan, District Kota (Raj.)
                                                                       ----Petitioner
                                       Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department
         Of Excise, Government Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2.       The Excise Commissioner, Government Of Rajasthan 2,
         Gumaniwala, Panchwati, Udaipur.
3.       The District Excise Officer, Kota.
4.       The District Excise Officer (Recovery), Kota.
5.       The Excise Inspector, Circle Kota (North), Kota.
                                                                    ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)            :     Mr. Vikram Singh Bhawla



                HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI

Order

17/10/2025

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in an

identical controversy, the Coordinate Bench at Jaipur Bench, Jaipur

vide judgment dated 07.10.2025 passed in SBCWP

No.11294/2025 (with other connected matters) in the case of Atar

Singh v. State of Rajasthan & Ors., has disposed of the writ

petitions with certain directions. Relevant part of the above-said

order reads as under:-

"xxxxx 21.1 In the event the petitioners file representations seeking refund of their amounts or ventilating any other grievances, the same shall be adjudicated by way of a speaking order, both on facts and on points of law, within

(Uploaded on 17/10/2025 at 06:12:55 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:45959] (2 of 3) [CW-20395/2025]

a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of such representation.

21.2 The authority concerned, namely, the Excise Commissioner, shall consider such representations de novo, uninfluenced by any observations made by this Court, and pass an order in accordance with law. 21.3 In the event of failure to pass such an order within the stipulated period, it shall be deemed that the claim of the petitioners is found valid, and consequently, the amount sought for refund shall be released forthwith. 21.4 The Court further clarifies that retention of money beyond the period of thirty days from the date of filing such representation shall attract interest @ 12% per annum on the amount lawfully due to the petitioners, till actual payment.

21.5 Till such adjudication is made by the appropriate authority, no coercive measures shall be taken against the petitioners.

22. The doctrine actus curiae neminem gravabit, meaning that the act of the court shall prejudice no one, further guides that administrative delay should not operate to the detriment of the petitioners' lawful rights. Thence, with the aforesaid observations and directions, the present batch of writ petitions stands disposed of.

23. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

Sd/-"

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner

would be satisfied, if the petitioner may be permitted to file fresh

representation before the respondent-authorities, which may be

considered and decided by the respondent-authorities in light of

the judgment passed in the case of Atar Singh (supra), strictly in

accordance with law and in a time bound manner.

3. In view of the limited submission made, this Court deems it

appropriate to direct the petitioner to submit a fresh

(Uploaded on 17/10/2025 at 06:12:55 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:45959] (3 of 3) [CW-20395/2025]

representation before the respondent-authorities within a period of

'7 days' from today, upon filing of the said representation, the

same shall be considered and decided by the respondent-

authorities within a period of 'one month' thereafter; strictly in

accordance with law while taking into consideration the judgment

passed in the case of Atar Singh (supra).

4. It is made clear that the respondent-authorities shall

examine the petitioner's case in detail and decide prior to passing

a speaking order whether the principles laid down in Atar Singh

(supra) are applicable to the case of the petitioner.

5. With the aforesaid direction, the instant writ petition stands

disposed of. Stay application as well as all other pending

application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

(DR. NUPUR BHATI),J

19-Devesh/-

(Uploaded on 17/10/2025 at 06:12:55 PM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter