HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2841/2004 1. Hari Narayan S/o Prabhu Dayal, aged 40 years, Resident of Ward No. 17, Chaudhriyon Ki Bagichi, National Highway No. 8, Shahpura, District Jaipur. 2. Sultan S/o Prabhu Dayal, R/o Shahpura Transport Company, Transport Nagar, Calcutta. 3. Smt. Prem D/o Prabhu Dayal W/o Chhaguram, R/o Village and post Ghata, Tehsil Neem Ka Thana, District Jaipur. 4. Smt. Garima D/o Prabhu Dayal w/o Sadhuram R/o Radawas Tehsil Shahpura, District Jaipur. 5. Smt. Surgyani D/o Prabhu Dayal W/o Umrao Singh R/o Jharli Tehsil Srimadhopur District Sikar. 6. Smt. Shanti D/o Prabhu Dayal w/o Shivdan R/o Jharli Tehsil Srimadhopur District Sikar. 7. Raji D/o Prabhu Dayal w/o Kalyan R/o Jharli Tehsil Srimadhopur District Sikar. 8. Pappu S/o Prabhu Dayal, R/o Ward No. 17, Chaudhriyon Ki Bagichi, National Highway No. 8, Shahpura, District Jaipur. ----Petitioners Versus 1. State of Rajasthan through the Secretary in the Department of Revenue, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur. 2. The Board of Revenue for Rajasthan, Ajmer. 3. The Assistant Collector, Shahpura, Distt. Jaipur. 4. The Tehsildar, Shahpura, District Jaipur. 5. Satish Chandra S/o Gheesulal 6. Sunil Kumar S/o Gheesulal 7. Smt. Usha Gupta widow of Heeralal 8. Smt. Sunita Gupta D/o Heeralal All R/o Radha Damodar Ji Ki Gali, Chaura Rasta, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Roshan Saini for Mr. Sanjay Mehrishi For Respondent(s) : Mr. Neeraj Batra, GC with Ms. Gunjan Chawla, Mr. Harshit Parashar and Mr. P.L. Bairwa JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order (2 of 3) [CW-2841/2004] 23/07/2025 1. Counsels for the parties submit that two identical writ petitions bearing S.B. Civil Writ Petitions No.2881/2004 and 2841/2004 were submitted by the same petitioner against the same respondents with regard to the same cause of action. Counsels submit that on earlier occasions, whenever, the matters were listed before the Court, both petitions were listed together, but on the fateful day, when the other petition bearing SB CWP No.2881/2001 was listed before the Co- ordinate Bench on 21.07.2010, the instant Writ Petition No.2841/2004 was not listed and on that day, SB CWP No.2881/2004 was decided on the basis of the compromise between the parties. Counsels submit that the compromise was taken on the record and the matter was disposed of in terms of the compromise. 2. Counsels submit that since compromise has taken place between the parties in both matters, therefore, the instant writ petition be also disposed of in light of the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 21.07.2010 while deciding SB CWP No.2881/2004. 3. Heard and considered the submission made at Bar and perused the material available on the record and also perused the order dated 21.07.2010 passed by the Court in SB CWP No.2881/2004. 4. Since the parties have settled their dispute and identical writ petition has been disposed of by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 21.07.2010, the instant writ petition also stands disposed of in terms of the order dated (3 of 3) [CW-2841/2004] 21.07.2010 i.e. in terms of the compromise between the parties. 5. The stay application and all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J KuD/24