Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Manju Mitharwal vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:40587) on 11 September, 2025
Author: Nupur Bhati
Bench: Nupur Bhati
[2025:RJ-JD:40587]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16572/2025
1. Manju Mitharwal D/o Sher Singh Mitharwal W/o Ramdev
Ram, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Mavliya, Ladpur, District
Sikar.
2. Mamta W/o Rakesh Kumar Garhwal, Aged About 32
Years, R/o Gumana Ka Bas, Post Katrathal, Years, District
Sikar.
3. Sonu Kumari D/o Mangla Ram W/o Chena Ram Malinda,
Aged About 33 Years, R/o Koliya, Post Koliya, District
Nagaur.
4. Sumitra W/o Vijay Kumar, Aged About 39 Years, R/o
Karanpura, Ladria, District Churu.
5. Rameshwari W/o Raju Ram, Aged About 33 Years, R/o
Bader, District Nagaur.
6. Sunita Kumari W/o Sushil Kumar, Aged About 40 Years,
R/o Mukhya Abadi, Vpo Panthariya, District Jhunjhunu.
7. Pinki Bai Meena W/o Meghram Meena, Aged About 37
Years, R/o Kishorpur, Post Pakhar, District Dausa.
8. Munesh Kumari W/o Abhishek Moond, Aged About 35
Years, R/o Ward No.03, Bhagat Singh Colony, Nawalgarh,
District Jhunjhunu.
9. Sangeeta Chouhan W/o Suraj Singh Bohara, Aged About
34 Years, R/o 53/42, Maanganj Mohalla, Masuda Road,
Beawar, District Ajmer (Now Beawar).
10. Manju D/o Dalu Ram Kumawat, Aged About 32 Years, R/o
Badla Ka Bas, Kuchaman City, Nawa, District Nagaur.
11. Jitender Kumar S/o Banwari Lal, Aged About 41 Years, R/
o Panthroli, Tehsil Buhana, District Jhunjhunu.
12. Mukesh Kumar Dewanda S/o Jainarayan Dewanda, Aged
About 40 Years, R/o Ward No.02, Dhani Nadawali, Devan,
Tehsil Shahpura, District Jaipur.
13. Indra Singh S/o Hukam Singh, Aged About 44 Years, R/o
Chowk Jaisalmer, Jaisalmer.
14. Moola Ram S/o Tiloka Ram, Aged About 50 Years, R/o
Village Nedan, District Jaisalmer.
15. Shantilal S/o Mansha Ram, Aged About 42 Years, R/o
Meghwalo Ka Bas, Dodiyali, District Jalore.
16. Ramesh Gurjar S/o Ranglal Gurjar, Aged About 43 Years,
R/o Gurjaro Ka Mohalla, Village Sandera, Tehsil Peeplu,
(Uploaded on 11/09/2025 at 06:23:50 PM)
(Downloaded on 11/09/2025 at 09:13:48 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:40587] (2 of 4) [CW-16572/2025]
District Tonk.
17. Leela W/o Mahaveer Prasad, Aged About 39 Years, R/o
Jato Ka Bass, Dhandhlas Uda, District Nagaur.
18. Anju D/o Sanvar Mal, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Sewad
Chhoti, Sewad Badi, District Sikar.
19. Manohar Singh S/o Bhoor Singh, Aged About 53 Years, R/
o Kheenwsar Khinya, District Jaisalmer.
20. Shiv Kumar Sharma S/o Sohan Lal Sharma, Aged About
50 Years, R/o Village Jor Ka Khera, Mundeta, Bhojpur,
District Bhilwara.
21. Jugata Ram S/o Nakhatu Ram, Aged About 53 Years, R/o
Meghwalon Ka Vas, Parewar, District Jaisalmer.
22. Manali Suthar W/o Devi Lal, Aged About 32 Years, R/o
Ward No.02, Padampur, District Sri Ganganagar.
23. Ramkalyan Bairwa S/o Ram Kishan Bairwa, Aged About
47 Years, R/o Paroliya, Nipaniya, District Baran.
24. Ashok Kumar Balai S/o Keshu Ram, Aged About 45 Years,
R/o Ward No.01, Kharnota, District, Rajsamand.
25. Babu Lal Meena S/o Deva Ram, Aged About 51 Years, R/o
Village Gudha Gumansingh, Tehsil Bali, District Pali.
----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,
Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
4. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
5. Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Bhaniyana,
District Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
6. Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Mohangarh,
District Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
7. Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Sankara, District
Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
8. Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Adel, District
(Uploaded on 11/09/2025 at 06:23:50 PM)
(Downloaded on 11/09/2025 at 09:13:48 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:40587] (3 of 4) [CW-16572/2025]
Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mahendra Kumar Gurjar with
Mr. Pawan Singh
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI
Order
11/09/2025
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.
6. In the aforesaid premise, the writ petition is disposed of with
a liberty to the petitioners to file a fresh representation, which
(Uploaded on 11/09/2025 at 06:23:50 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:40587] (4 of 4) [CW-16572/2025]
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
256-/Devesh/-
(Uploaded on 11/09/2025 at 06:23:50 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
