HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3769/2025 Vedsingh Dhakad Son of Late Shri Rambhajan Dhakad, Aged About 58 Years, Resident Of Behind Government Hospital, Bhailapura, Hindaun City, District Karauli, Rajasthan- 322230. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Chairman, Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Chomu House, Headquarter Transport Marg, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 2. Executive Director Administration, Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Chomu House, Headquarter Transport Marg, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 3. Chief Manager, Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Bundi Depot, District Bundi, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ajay Pratap Singh For Respondent(s) : JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 19/03/2025 1. The instant writ petition has been file with the following prayer: i. By issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, for expeditious disposal of case no. MIT 147/2002 pending before Ld. Labour Court, Jaipur. ii. By issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction which may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstance of the case in favour of the petitioner with cost. iii. Cost of the writ petition may also be awarded in favour of the petitioner. (2 of 3) [CW-3769/2025] 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the services of the petitioner were terminated by the respondents vide order dated 28.06.2002 and thereafter, an application bearing MIT No.147/2002 under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short ‘the Act of 1947’) was submitted by the respondents before the Industrial Tribunal, Jaipur seeking approval of the aforesaid termination order in the year 2002. Counsel submits that in- spite of passing of more than 22 years, till date, the application is pending before the Tribunal for its adjudication on the merits and the same has not been decided. Counsel submits that whenever, the matter was posted before the Tribunal, the case was referred from one date to another for different reasons. Counsel submits that the petitioner is a specially abled person and he is suffering financial crunch on account of pendency of the above application before the Tribunal, therefore, appropriate directions be issued to the Tribunal to decide the pending application expeditiously, as early as possible, preferably within a time frame. 3. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on the record. 4. Perusal of the record and the order-sheets indicate that an application under Section 33(2)(b) of the Act of 1947 was submitted by the respondents before the Tribunal seeking approval of termination order dated 28.06.2002 passed by them against the petitioner. The said application is pending before the Tribunal since last more than two decades. (3 of 3) [CW-3769/2025] 5. It is quite shocking and surprising on the part of the Tribunal that in-spite of passing of more than 22 years, till date, the matter is pending and the same has not been decided on its merits. 6. Right to speedy trial is a fundamental right of a person contained under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, which has been violated in the instant case. 7. Taking a serious note of the above factual aspect of the matter, the instant writ petition stands disposed of with directions to the Tribunal to decide the application (pending, if any) expeditiously as early as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 8. It is made clear that non-compliance of this order would be viewed seriously. 9. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J KuD/53