Dismissed

Surya Prakash v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC1 Feb 2021CW/1768/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan at Jodhpur disposed of the writ petition relating to service matters by relying on a coordinate bench judgment, Gopiram Gurjar. The court issued directions to the State respondents to decide the petitioners' representation within ten weeks and disposed of the stay application accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Direction to State respondents to decide representation within ten weeks; writ and stay applications disposed of in light of Gopiram Gurjar order.

Surya Prakash Vs State of Rajasthan — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1768/2021

¶3

Surya Prakash S/o Shri Ghanshyam Joshi, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Gram Panchayat Kanwaliya Kallan, Panchayat Samiti Jaitaran, District Pali, Rajasthan.

¶4

Narsingh Regar S/o Shri Pratap Ram, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Gram Panchayat Saran, Panchayat Samiti Marwar Junction, District Pali, Rajasthan.

¶5

Amar Bharti S/o Shri Mula Bharti, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Gram Panchayat Chirpatiya, Panchayat Samiti Marwar Junction, District Pali, Rajasthan.

¶6

Shravan Kumar S/o Shri Ghisa Ram, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Gram Panchayat Banta, Panchayat Samiti Marwar Junction, District Pali, Rajasthan.

¶7

Ganpat Das S/o Shri Bhurdas Saad, Aged About 52 Years, R/o Gram Panchayat Bhimaliya, Panchayat Samiti Marwar Junction, District Pali, Rajasthan.

¶8

Dhagla Ram S/o Shri Lumba Ram, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Gram Panchayat Basni Jojawar, Panchayat Samiti Marwar Junction, District Pali, Rajasthan.

¶9

Jagdish S/o Shri Amraram Nayak, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Gram Panchayat Bornadi, Panchayat Samiti Marwar Junction, District Pali, Rajasthan.

¶10

Narayan Lal S/o Shri Vachna Ram Gurjar, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Gram Panchayat Sehvaj, Panchayat Samiti Marwar Junction, District Pali, Rajasthan.

¶11

Dhana Ram S/o Shri Mula Ram Prajapat, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Gram Panchayat Higola Khurd, Panchayat Samiti Marwar Junction, District Pali, Rajasthan.

¶12

Kana Ram S/o Shri Puna Ram, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Gram Panchayat Ranawas, Panchayat Samiti Marwar Junction, District Pali, Rajasthan.

¶13

----Petitioners

¶14

Versus

¶15

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department Of Rural Development And Panchayati Raj (Panchayati Raj), Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶16

Deputy Secretary, Rural Development And Panchayati Raj

¶17

(2 of 3)

¶18

[CW-1768/2021]

¶19

Department, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶20

District Collector, Pali, District Pali, Rajasthan.

¶21

Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Pali, Rajasthan.

¶22

Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Jaitaran, District Pali, Rajasthan.

¶23

Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Marwar Junction, District Pali, Rajasthan.

¶24

----Respondents

¶25

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pawan Singh. For Respondent(s) :

¶26

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI

¶27

Order

¶28

01/02/2021

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the issue raised in the present writ petition is identical to S.B Civil Writ Petition No.10695/2018 (Gopiram Gurjar & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.), decided on 16.05.2018 and that similar relief be granted to the petitioners also.

¶30

In the case of Gopiram Gurjar (supra), a Coordinate Bench of this Court observed as under:-

¶31

“It is further contended that for the present; the petitioners would be satisfied, if the State respondents are directed to decide the representation of the petitioners, within a time frame, in the light of the adjudication in the case of Mukesh Kumar Khatik (supra), which they are ready and willing to address within two weeks hereinafter.

¶32

In view of the limited prayer addressed; the instant writ proceedings are closed with a direction to the petitioners to address a comprehensive ventilating the grievances raised in the writ application.

¶33

(3 of 3)

¶34

[CW-1768/2021]

¶35

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

¶36

With the observations and directions, as indicated above, the writ application stands disposed of.”

¶37

In view of the submissions made, the writ petition filed by the petitioners is disposed of in light of and with similar directions as given in the case of Gopiram Gurjar (supra).

¶38

The stay application also stands disposed of accordingly.

¶39

(ARUN BHANSALI),J

¶40

105-Sumit/-

Surya Prakash v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surya Prakash v. State of Rajasthan

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

Jeevan Ram Vs Lrs of Joraram

Babu Mohammad Mansuri Vs the Assistant Engineer, PWD

Vartika Dube Vs Somesh Sharma

Bhanwar Lal Paliwal Vs State of Rajasthan

Chhel Narayan Vs State of Rajasthan

Aarti Khandelwal Vs the State of Rajasthan