[2025:RJ-JP:4186] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6837/2024 Mahavir Prasad S/o Shri Prabhulal Rathore, aged About 61 Years, R/o Near Satti Chabutra, Kotdi Gordhanpura, Kota At Present House No. 169, Near Chothmata Mandir, Kotdi, Gordhanpura, Kota Rajasthan. ----Petitioner/plaintiff Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through District Collector, Kota Rajasthan. 2. The District Education Officer, Boys Institutions, Gumanpura, Kota Rajasthan. ------Respondents/Defendants 3. Prem Bai D/o Kishan Lal Sain, aged About 66 Years, R/o Shetlaji Chowk, Ladpura, Kota 4. Jugal Kishore Puri S/o Shri Laxman Puri, Aged About 66 Years, R/o Kethun, Tehsil Ladpura District Kota 5. Laxminarayan Tripathi S/o Shri Jagannath Tripathi, Aged About 65 Years, R/o Tripathi Bhawan, Chawni, Kota 6. Satyanarayan Rathore, Aged About 61 Years, R/o Shri Topilal Rathore, R/o Chawni, Kota 7. Heera Lal S/o Shri Manglya Suman, Aged About 63 Years, R/o Village Aradkhoda, Tehsil Ladpura, District Kota 8. Bhawani Shankar S/o Shri Kaluram Bhoi, Aged About 62 Years, R/o Bhoi Mohalla, Kotdi, Gordhanpura, Kota 9. Sewalal S/o Shri Pannalal Bairwa, R/o Khand Gawdi, Tehsil Ladpura, District Kota 10. Chandra Prakash Vaishav S/o Shri Kesri Lal, R/o Village Pandulia, Tehsil Digod, District Kota 11. Balmukund Rathore S/o Shrilal Rathore, R/o Kala Talab, Tehsil Ladpura, District Kota ----Proforma Respondents Connect with S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6934/2024 Sewa Lal S/o Shri Panna Lal Raiger, Aged About 67 Years, R/o Khand Gawandi, Tehsil Ladpura, District Kota At Present R/o Near Samria Kirana Store, Civil Lines Kota. ----Petitioner/plaintiff Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through District Collector, Kota Rajasthan. 2. The District Education Officer, Boys Institutions, [2025:RJ-JP:4186] (2 of 4) [CW-6837/2024] Gumanpura, Kota Rajasthan. ...........respondent/Defendant 3. Prem Bai D/o Kishan Lal Sain, Aged About 66 Years, R/o Shetlaji Chowk, Ladpura, Kota. 4. Jugal Kishore Puri S/o Shri Laxman Puri, Aged About 66 Years, R/o Kethun, Tehsil Ladpura, District Kota. 5. Laxminarayan Tripathi S/o Shri Jagannath Tripathi, Aged About 65 Years, R/o Tripathi Bhawan, Chawni, Kota. 6. Satyanarayan Rathore, Aged About 61 Years, R/o Shri Topilal Rathore, R/o Chawni Kota. 7. Heera Lal S/o Shri Manglya Suman, Aged About 63 Years, R/o Village Aradkhoda, Tehsil Ladpura, District Kota. 8. Mahaveer Prasad S/o Shri Prabhulal Rathore, Aged About 58 Years, R/o Near Satti Chabutra, Kotdi, Gordhanpura, Kota. 9. Bhawani Shankar S/o Shri Kaluram Bhoi, Aged About 62 Years, R/o Bhoi Mohalla, Kotdi, Gordhanpura, Kota. 10. Chandra Prakash Vaishav S/o Shri Kesri Lal, R/o Village Pandulia, Tehsil Digod, District Kota. 11. Balmukund Rathore S/o Shrilal Rathore, R/o Kala Talab, Tehsil Ladpura, District Kota. ---Proforma-Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jeetesh Kumawat for Mr. Pradeep Singh For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL Order 30/01/2025 1. Both writ petitions arise out of a common civil suit instituted way back on 07.09.1991 by ten persons jointly and both petitioners were plaintiff No.6 and 8 therein and they are aggrieved by rejection of their respective applications, declining to restore the civil suit after a delay of about 25 years, hence, both the writ petitions have been heard together and would stand decided by this common order. [2025:RJ-JP:4186] (3 of 4) [CW-6837/2024] 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the record. 3. It appears that as many as 10 persons filed a joint civil suit making a prayer for regularization of their pay and pay fixation. The civil suit was filed on 07.09.1991 and same came to be dismissed in default on 09.12.1996. 4. Out of 10 plaintiffs, only plaintiff Nos.6 and 8 i.e. both the petitioners, filed applications for restoration of civil suit under Order 9 Rule 9 CPC alongwith an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act on 23.11.2021 and 24.11.2024 respectively. It is apparent that the restoration applications were filed after a delay of near about 25 years and the reason for delay was assigned that the petitioners were transferred during this period from one place to another place. 5. The trial Court did not find the reason, assigned by the petitioners, as sufficient to condone the huge delay of 25 years and their applications for restoration of civil suit were dismissed by two separate orders of even date, dated 25.05.2022. 6. Both petitioners preferred two separate civil misc. appeal which too were considered on merits and have been dismissed vide two separate orders of even date, dated 23.02.2024. 7. Before this Court as well, petitioners have miserably failed to assign justified and reasonable reason to condone the delay of 25 years as well as for subsistence of the cause of action to restore and continue the civil suit filed way back on 07.09.1991. 8. After arguing the writ petitions, counsel for the petitioners, having instructions from the petitioners, prays for withdrawal of the writ petitions. [2025:RJ-JP:4186] (4 of 4) [CW-6837/2024] 9. Prayer is granted. 10. Both writ petitions are dismissed as withdrawn in limine at this stage itself. 11. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of. (SUDESH BANSAL),J TN/14-15