Disposed

Tejas Prajapati S/O Suresh Kumar Prajapati v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC2 Dec 2025CW/17365/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner's online application for a Non-Creamy Layer OBC Certificate was returned with a direction to apply under the Creamy Layer category; his representation remained undecided for over a year. The court directed the District Collector and Additional District Collector to decide the representation by a reasoned and speaking order within four weeks.

What the court decided

AI extract

Tejas Prajapati S/O Suresh Kumar Prajapati Vs the State of Rajasthan — Rajasthan HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:48865]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17365/2025

¶4

Tejas Prajapati S/o Suresh Kumar Prajapati, Aged About 16 Years, R/o Village Dabla, Buntiya, Tehsil And District Churu, Rajasthan Pin 331001 Minor Through His Natural Guardian His Father Suresh Kumar Prajapati S/o Bhagwana Ram, Aged About 46 Years, R/o Village Dabla, Buntiya, Tehsil And District Churu, Rajasthan, Pin 331001

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary To The Government, Department Of Personnel, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶8

The District Collector, Churu, Office Of District Collector, Churu, Rajasthan.

¶9

The Additional District Collector, Churu, Office Of Additional District Collector, Churu, Rajasthan.

¶10

Sub Divisional Magistrate, Churu, Office Of Sub Divisional Magistrate, Churu, Rajasthan.

¶11

----Respondents

¶12

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ankur Srivastava For Respondent(s) :

¶13

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP TANEJA

¶14

Order

¶15

02/12/2025

¶16

The case of petitioner is that he submitted an online application on 16.08.2024 for issuance of a Non- Creamy Layer OBC Certificate and paid the requisite fee, for which a receipt dated 04.09.2024 was issued. However, on 06.09.2024, the application was returned online with a remark directing him to apply under the OBC Creamy Layer category.

[2025:RJ-JP:48865]

[CW-17365/2025]

(2 of 2)

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in response to the said remark, the petitioner has already submitted a detailed representation to respondent Nos.2 and 3. However, despite the lapse of more than one year, the said representation has not yet been decided by the respondents.

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioner makes a limited prayer that the respondent Nos.2 and 3 may be directed to decide the representation of petitioner in a time-bound manner.

¶22

In view of the limited prayer so made, the respondent Nos.2 and 3 are directed to consider and decide the petitioner's representation (if pending) or if submitted by the petitioner, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this Order, by passing a reasoned and speaking order.

¶23

With the aforesaid direction, the present writ petition is disposed of.

¶24

Stay application and any other pending application, if any, also stand disposed of.

¶25

(SANDEEP TANEJA),J

¶26

TN/15

Tejas Prajapati S/O Suresh Kumar Prajapati v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Tejas Prajapati S/O Suresh Kumar Prajapati v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanjeet Transport and Concert Vs State of Rajasthan

Nandkishore Saini S/O Shri Babu Lal Saini Vs Jaipur Development Authority

Pooja Kumari W/O Omprakash D/O Satyapal Vs State of Rajasthan

Shri Balaji Enterprises Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramprasad Jat S/O Shri Laxman Jat Vs the Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue

Manisha Bhatnagar S/O Avinash Chandra Bhaatnagar Vs Bajaj Finance Limited