ANIL KUMAR GAUTAM v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
Court: High Court of Rajasthan
Bench: ARUN MONGA
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Rajasthan judgment dated 2025-01-29. ANIL KUMAR GAUTAM v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
[2025:RJ-JD:5719] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1808/2025 Anil Kumar Gautam S/o Rajpal Gautam, Aged About 59 Years, R/ o Sant Vinoba Nagar, Jalesar Road, Near By Veterinary Hospital, Sadabaad, District Mathura, Uttar Pradesh. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Department Of Rural Development And Panchayati Raj, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur. 2. Chief Executive Officer, Jila Parishad, Sirohi. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jitendra Mohan Choudhary. For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA Order 29/01/2025 1. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the issue raised in the present writ petition is covered by a judgment rendered by Division Bench of this Court in Dr. (Smt. ) Pushpa Mehta Vs. Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal & Ors. Reported in 2001(1) RLR 398.
He submits that the petitioner is sanguine that, in case he is allowed to file a representation qua the grievance raised in the present writ petition and the same is considered in light of the aforesaid judgment, he will be meted out with favorable treatment. 2. Request seems to be fair. 3. Given the nature of order which is being passed, no prejudice would be caused to the respondents and, therefore, the [2025:RJ-JD:5719] (2 of 2) [CW-1808/2025] requirement of issuance of notice is dispensed with as no return is required to be filed by them. 4. In the aforesaid premise, without commenting on the merits of the case, 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. 5.
Needless to say that the competent authority shall go through the judgment relied upon by learned counsel for the petitioners as mentioned hereinabove and apply its independent mind on the applicability of the same before passing any order. In case, judgment ibid is not applicable to the petitioner’s case, specific reasons thereof would be given by passing a speaking order as expeditiously as possible within a period of 30 days from the date petitioner approaches the competent authority with a webprint of the instant order. 6. Until the representation of the petitioner is decided, effect and operation of the order dated 15. 01. 2025 (Annex. 2), qua the petitioner, shall remain stayed. 7. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of. (ARUN MONGA),J 311-Sumit/Jitender/-
Source: High Court of Rajasthan. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.