Disposed

Ganpat Singh v. State of Raj and Ors.

Rajasthan HC1 Mar 2017CW/1387/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court noted prior coordinate bench decisions involved substantial question. Petitioner directed to file comprehensive representation with copies of related orders. State directed to decide by reasoned order within four weeks. Writ and stay disposed upon filing.

What did the court decide?

Direction to petitioner to address comprehensive representation; State to decide by reasoned order within four weeks.

Ganpat Singh Vs State of Raj and Ors. — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2017)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B.Civil Writ Petition No. 1387 / 2017

¶3

Ganpat Singh (Driver) No. 726, Son of Shri Kalyan Singh, Present Working At Police Line,, Aged About 41 Years, Rajsamand (Rajasthan)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Rajasthan Through Its Principal Secretary, Department of Finance (Rules),, Government of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur

¶7

Director General of Police,, Police Head Quarter, Lal Kothi, Jaipur

¶8

Superintendent of Police,, Rajsamand (Rajasthan)

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. M.S. Raghav For Respondent(s) :

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA

¶12

Order

¶13

01/03/2017

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the very outset, submits that the controversy raised in the instant writ application is no more res-integra in view of the adjudication made by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of State of Rajasthan & Anr. v. Gopal Singh: S.B. Civil Writ Petition Number 7101/2014, vide order dated 17.07.2014; The State of Rajasthan & Ors. v. Sultan Singh: S.B. Civil Writ Petition Number 9363/2015, vide order dated 23.07.2015 and Kuldeep Singh & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B. Civil Writ Petition Number 3926/2013, vide order dated 26.04.2013.

¶15

It is further contended that the petitioner, at this stage, would be satisfied, if the State-respondents are directed to decide the

¶16

(2 of 2)

¶17

[CW-1387/2017]

¶18

representation of the petitioner, within a time frame, which he is ready and willing to address within two weeks hereinafter.

¶19

In view of the limited prayer addressed; the instant writ proceedings are closed with a direction to the petitioner to address a comprehensive representation enclosing the copies of the orders passed in the case of Gopal Singh, Sultan Singh and Kuldeep Singh (supra).

¶20

In case, a representation is so addressed within the period aforesaid; the State-respondents are directed to consider and decide the same by a reasoned and speaking order as expeditiously as possible; however, in no case later than four weeks from the date of receipt of the representation along with a certified copy of this order.

¶21

With the observations and directions, as indicated above, the writ as well as stay application stand disposed off.

¶22

(VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA)J.

¶23

Ashu/33

Ganpat Singh v. State of Raj and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ganpat Singh v. State of Raj and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kiran Devi Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Dr Kc Gupta Vs State

Suwalal Dusad Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Dhanna Lal and Another Vs Jagdish Saini and Others

Bunty @ Jitendra Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Shiv Naryan Sen Vs State of Raj and Ors.