Dismissed

Sunita Choudhary v. State

Rajasthan HC12 Dec 2023CW/7904/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court disposed of the writ petition filed by aggrieved persons seeking appointment of meritorious candidates and quashing of appointments. The court held that respondents' instructions provided a remedy of filing a representation/appeal before concerned authorities for grievances.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed; liberty granted to file representation/appeal with concerned authorities.

Sunita Choudhary Vs State — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023:RJ-JP:39136]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7904/2006

¶4

Sunita Choudhary, Wife Of Suresh Kumar, Chachi Wad Bada, Teh. Fatehpur, Dist. Sikar

¶5

Sarita Kumari, Wife Of Prabhu Singh, Chachiwad Bada, Teh. Fatehpur, Dist. Sikar

¶6

Manju Devi, Wife Of Shishpal Singh, Dhani Ridmal, Post Datru, Tehsil Fatehpur, Dist. Sikar

¶7

----Petitioners

¶8

Versus

¶9

State Of Rajasthan Through Secretary, Department Of Panchayati Raj, Secretariat, Jaipur

¶10

Secretary, Department Of Social Welfare, Secretariat, Jaipur

¶11

District Collector, Sikar

¶12

Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Sikar

¶13

Asstt. Child Development Project Officer, Fatehpur, Dist. Sikar

¶14

Sub Divisional Officer, Fatehpur, Dist. Sikar

¶15

Ayub Khan, Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Datru, Panchayat Samiti, Fatehpur, Dist. Sikar

¶16

Prem Chand Jangid, S/o Jagdish Jangid, Gram Sachiv, Gram Panchayat Dataru, At Present R/o Harsawa Bada, Fatehpur, Dist. Sikar

¶17

Suman Devi Wife Of Laxman Singh, Chachiwad Bada, Fatehpur, Dist. Sikar

¶18

Sarita Devi, Wife Of Shantanu Kumar, Dhani Ridmal, Post Datru, Fatehpur, Dist. Sikar

¶19

----Respondents

¶20

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Tanmay Dhand For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sumit, Adv. for respondent No. 9 & 10

¶21

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA

Judgment / Order

(2 of 2)

[2023:RJ-JP:39136]

[CW-7904/2006]

12/12/2023

The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners

¶28

with the following prayers:-

¶29

“i) direct the respondents to conduct

¶30

fresh meeting of Gram Sabha for appointments of Karya Karta and Sahyogini and give appointment to the meritorious candidates only by way of selection process.

¶31

ii) quash and set aside the appointment (if any) of Respondents Nos. 9 and 10 and

¶32

iii) direct the appropriate authorities to take appropriate action against the Respondent No.7 for creating false documents of meeting of Gram Sabha without conducting the same on 25.08.06”

¶33

As per the instructions issued by the respondents, in such type cases, the aggrieved persons have a remedy to make a representation/appeal before the concerned authority.

¶34

In view of the instructions issued by the respondentDepartment, the petitioners may approach the respondentauthorities by filing a representation/appeal for their grievances which have been raised in the present petition.

¶35

This writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to raise their grievances before the competent authority by filing a representation/appeal.

¶36

Since the main petition has been disposed of, all pending application/s, if any, also stand disposed.

¶37

(GANESH RAM MEENA),J

¶38

DIVYA SAINI /67

Sunita Choudhary v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunita Choudhary v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Lalit Kumar Rawat Vs State Education Departmentanr

Shahbuddin Vs State Dep of Education Ors.

Madan Lal Luniaandors Vs State Education Departmentors

Seema Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Mahendra Kumar Bijarnia and Anr. Vs State Panchayati Raj Ors.

Dr. Gajendra Singh Sisodia S/O Shri Mohan Singh Sisodia Vs the State of Rajasthan through Additional Chief Secretary