Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Jagadish Kumar vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:39374) on 4 September, 2025
Author: Nupur Bhati
Bench: Nupur Bhati
[2025:RJ-JD:39374]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16946/2025
1. Jagadish Kumar S/o Goba Ram, Aged About 47 Years,
Village Chaura, Tehsil Sanchore, District Jalore.
2. Bhanwar Lal S/o Ratna Ram, Aged About 43 Years, Village
Bijrol Goliya, Tehsil Sanchore, District Jalore.
3. Bhanwar Lal Bheel S/o Karishna Ram, Aged About 39
Years, Village Dangara Kaka, Post Dhanta, Tehsil
Sanchore, District Jalore.
4. Jabra Ram S/o Prema Ram, Aged About 41 Years, Village
Sankar, District Jalore.
5. Vijeyta Kumari D/o Bhoopal Singh, Aged About 44 Years,
Ward No. 06, Behind Panchayat Samiti Alwar Road, Nagar,
District Bharatpur.
6. Renuka Kumari D/o Ambalal W/o Peer Chand, Aged About
41 Years, Jeengar Colony, Sanchore, District Jalore.
7. Alka Yadav D/o Prakah Chand Yadav, Aged About 32
Years, Pipali Stand, Post Dhoblai, Raisingh Ka Bas, Jaipur.
8. Santosh Kumari D/o Ramchandra Doodi W/o Amit Kumar,
Aged About 47 Years, Ward No. 09, Togra Kalan, District
Jhunjhunu.
9. Kusma Devi D/o Bhagwan Singh W/o Suresh Chand, Aged
About 47 Years, Nagla Dharsoni, District Bharatpur.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary,
Department Of Rural Development And Panchayati Raj
(Panchayati Raj), Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur,
Rajasthan.
2. Additional Commissioner, Rural Development And
Panchayati Raj Department, Government Of Rajasthan,
Jaipur.
3. District Programme Coordinator And District Collector,
Jalore, Rajasthan.
4. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Jalore, Rajasthan.
5. Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Sanchore, District
Jalore, Rajasthan.
(Downloaded on 04/09/2025 at 09:50:39 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:39374] (2 of 3) [CW-16946/2025]
6. Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Raniwara, District
Jalore, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pawan Singh
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI
Order
04/09/2025
1. Petition herein arises, inter alia, out of the inaction on the
part of the respondents in not according the correct service and
notional benefits to the petitioners.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners at the outset submits that
qua the aforesaid grievance, the petitioners may be granted
liberty to file a fresh representation before the competent
authority and the same be decided by passing appropriate
administrative orders, in accordance with law.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners also relies on
order/judgment in Nand Kishore Sharma & Ors. v. The State
of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B. Civil Writ Petition
No.12109/2018, decided on 18.07.2018 at Jaipur Bench and
submits that the respondents may be directed to consider the
representation of the petitioners in light of the aforesaid
judgment.
4. Request seems to be fair.
5. Given the nature of order which is being passed, no
prejudice would be caused to the respondents and, therefore, the
requirement of issuance of notice is dispensed with as no return is
required to be filed by them.
[2025:RJ-JD:39374] (3 of 3) [CW-16946/2025]
6. In the aforesaid premise, 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.
7. 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.
8. Needful be done as expeditiously as possible.
(DR. NUPUR BHATI),J
216-/Devesh/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
