[2025:RJ-JP:10524] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3522/2025 Richpal Meena S/o Shri Ghisaram Meena, Aged About 56 Years, R/o Village Abhaypur, Post Doongari Khurd, Tehsil Kishangarh, Renwal, District-Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Home Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Administrative Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.) 2. Director General Of Police, Police Headquarters, Lal Kothi, Jaipur. 3. Dditional Director General Of Police (Recruitment And Promotion Board), Rajasthan, Jaipur, Police Headquarters, Lal Kothi, Jaipur. 4. Commissioner Of Police, Jaipur, Rajasthan, Commissionerate Of Police, Jaipur, M.i. Road, Sardar Patel Marg, Ashok Nagar, Jaipur. 5. 5. Deputy Commissioner Of Police (Headquarters) Member Secretary Promotion Board, Commissionerate Of Police, Jaipur, M.i. Road, Sardar Patel Marg, Ashok Nagar, Jaipur. 6. Rampal Yadav S/o Shri Ram Yadav, At Present Working As Sub-Inspector, Commissionerate, Jaipur (Rajasthan). ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Udit Sharma For Respondent(s) : JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 07/03/2025 1. By way of filing this petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned seniority list dated 22.11.2019. [2025:RJ-JP:10524] (2 of 3) [CW-3522/2025] 2. The record indicates that the petitioner has already approached the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur (for short ‘the Tribunal’) by way of filing appeal assailing the same and the said appeal is still lying pending before the Tribunal for adjudication on its merits. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that till date, the appeal has not been decided and in the meantime, the respondents have issued certain dates, upon which the departmental examination is going to be conducted. Counsel submits that in case, such examination is allowed to be conducted, the right of the petitioner would be seriously prejudiced. Counsel submits that an application under Section 4-A of The Rajasthan Civil Services (Service Matters Appellate Tribunals) Act, 1976 (for short ‘the Act of 1976’) was submitted before the Tribunal for passing appropriate order in favour of the petitioner, but the said application is pending and the next date before the Tribunal is 12.03.2025. Counsel submits that under the compelling circumstances, he has approached this Court seeking appropriate directions. 4. Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on the record. 5. Once the petitioner has already availed the alternative statutory remedy of filing appeal before the Tribunal and the matter is subjudice before the Tribunal and the stay application filed by the petitioner is also pending before the Tribunal and the next date before the Tribunal is 12.03.2025, in the considered opinion of this Court, the petitioner cannot be allowed to avail two parallel remedies for redressal of the [2025:RJ-JP:10524] (3 of 3) [CW-3522/2025] same grievance. Once he has approached the Tribunal, it is expected from the Tribunal to decide not only the stay application, but also the appeal on its merits. Since, next date has already been fixed in the matter for 12.03.2025, this Court does not deem it just and proper to interfere with the matter. 6. In view of the above, the instant writ petition stands dismissed. The Tribunal is expected to hear and decide the application submitted by the petitioner under Section 4-A of the Act of 1976, on the same day i.e. on 12.03.2025 and if not possible, then fix a short date and the Tribunal is further directed to make all possible endeavor to decide the appeal expeditiously, as early as possible. 7. It is made clear that in case, any process is conducted by the respondents in between, the same would be subject to outcome of the appeal pending before the Tribunal. 8. The stay application and all pending applications, if any, also stand dismissed. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J KuD/178