Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 10559 (RAJ)

SUA DEVI v. STATE PANCHAYATI RAJ DEP ORS

CW/11961/2013 · 2025-08-06

Anoop Kumar Dhand

Public Interest Litigationbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:30217] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11961/2013 Sua Devi wife of Shri Bhanwar Jat, aged 57 years, resident of Sinodia, Panchayat Samiti Kishangarh, District Ajmer, presently Acting Sarpanch Gram Panchayat Sinoda, Panchayat Samiti Kishangarh, District Ajmer, Rajasthan ----Petitioner Versus 1. State of Rajasthan through Principal Secretary, Rural Development and Panchayati Raj Department (Panchayat Raj Department), Govt. of Rajasthan, Jaipur. 2. Under Secretary (Enquiry) Panchayati Raj Department, Govt. of Rajasthan, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur. 3. Divisional Commissioner, Ajmer, Division, Ajmer. 4. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Ajmer. 5. District Collector Ajmer, District Ajmer. 6. Manudi Devi W/o Sh. Sharwan Lal Gurjar, aged about 26 years, R/o Village Aau, Gram Panchayat Sinodia, Panchayat Samiti Kishangarh, District Ajmer, Raj. ----Respondents Connected With S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7368/2013 Mannudi Devi W/o Shri Sharvan Lal Gurjar, age about 26 years, Resident of Village Aau, Sarpanch Gram Panchayat Sinodia, Panchayat Samiti Kishangarh, District Ajmer (Rajasthan) ----Petitioner Versus 1. State of Principal Rajasthan through Secretary, Rural Development & Panchayatiraj Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur. 2. The Divisional Commissioner, Ajmer. 3. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Ajmer. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Anil Kumar Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr.Ashutosh Udawat & Mr.Sumit Purohit for Mr.Kapil Prakash Mathur, AAG Mr.Parth Singh Dhaked for [2025:RJ-JP:30217] (2 of 2) [CW-11961/2013] Mr.Pradeep Kumar Choudhary JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 06/08/2025 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by efflux of time, these writ petitions have become infructuous. 2. These instant writ petitions stand dismissed as rendered infructuous. Stay applications and all applications (pending, if any) also stand dismissed. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Aayush Sharma /87-88