Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Seeta Gandas vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:40591) on 11 September, 2025
Author: Nupur Bhati
Bench: Nupur Bhati
[2025:RJ-JD:40591]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17685/2025
1. Seeta Gandas D/o Ram Kumar Gandas, W/o Mala Ram,
Aged About 41 Years, R/o Dalman, Tehsil Sardarshahar,
District Churu.
2. Pramila D/o Mukhram Mahana, W/o Vijay Singh Kaswa,
Aged About 33 Years, R/o Ward No. 23, Mohalla Teliyan,
Ramgarh Shekhawat, Ramgarh, District Sikar.
3. Rajni Devi D/o Nirmal Chand, W/o Sonu, Aged About 43
Years, R/o Ward No. 09, 26 M.o.d., Gurusar, Modia,
District Sri Ganganagar.
4. Pooja Bhati D/o Pawan Kumar Bhati, Aged About 34
Years, R/o Shekhwati Public School Road, Ward No. 03,
Kudan, District Sikar.
5. Shiv Kumar Sharma S/o Sohan Lal Sharma, Aged About
50 Years, R/o Jor Ka Khera, Mundeta, Bhojpur, District
Bhilwara.
----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 Sankara, District
Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
6. Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Mohangarh,
District Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mahendra Kumar Gurjar with
Mr. Pawan Singh
(Uploaded on 11/09/2025 at 06:33:43 PM)
(Downloaded on 11/09/2025 at 06:57:54 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:40591] (2 of 3) [CW-17685/2025]
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
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
(Uploaded on 11/09/2025 at 06:33:43 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:40591] (3 of 3) [CW-17685/2025]
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
302-/Devesh/-
(Uploaded on 11/09/2025 at 06:33:43 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
