Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 15610 (RAJ)

JAGIRAM S/O ISHARDAS v. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

CW/7272/2024 · 2025-09-10

Anoop Kumar Dhand

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:36563] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.7272/2024 1. Jagiram S/o Ishardas, Aged About 47 Years, R/o Village Dheemri, Tehsil Pahadi, District Deeg. 2. Meva S/o Ishardas, Aged About 62 Years, R/o Village Dheemri, Tehsil Pahadi, District Deeg. 3. Suchcha Singh S/o Ishwarda, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Village Dheemri, Tehsil Pahadi, District Deeg. ----Petitioners Versus 1. District Collector, Deeg. 2. Sub Divisional Magistrate, Pahadi, District Deeg. 3. Tehsildar, Tehsil Pahadi, District Deeg. 4. Rasheed S/o Rahmat, R/o Village Dheemri, Tehsil Pahadi, District Deeg. 5. Vasid S/o Abbas, R/o Village Dheemri, Tehsil Pahadi, District Deeg. 6. Mustak S/o Majeed, R/o Village Dheemri, Tehsil Pahadi, District Deeg. 7. Abdul Gaffar S/o Sorab, R/o Village Dheemri, Tehsil Pahadi, District Deeg. 8. Jasmal S/o Rasoola, R/o Village Dheemri, Tehsil Pahadi, District Deeg. 9. Shabbir S/o Rahmat, R/o Village Dheemri, Tehsil Pahadi, District Deeg. 10. Ataulla S/o Tahir, R/o Village Dheemri, Tehsil Pahadi, District Deeg. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pawan Jandu JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 10/09/2025 1. For a limited prayer, the instant writ petition has been preferred for issuing directions to the respondents to decide the representation of the petitioners expeditiously. 2. The prayer of the petitioners appears to be genuine. [2025:RJ-JP:36563] (2 of 2) [CW-7272/2024] 3. The instant writ petition stands disposed of with direction to the respondents to decide the representation of the petitioners (pending, if any) expeditiously, as early as possible strictly in accordance with law. 4. The stay application and all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. 5. Before parting with the order, it is made clear that this Court has not passed any direction to the respondents to decide the representation of the petitioners in a particular way. The respondents would be at liberty to decide the same strictly in accordance with law. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Karan/28