[2025:RJ-JP:39251] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7562/2025 Vikram Verma S/o Sh. Ram Chandra, Aged About 45 Years, R/o 16, Balaiyo Ka Mohalla, Ganeshwar, Sikar, Rajasthan-332705 ----Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Sanskrit Education Department, Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur. 2. Directorate of Sanskrit Education, Rajasthan Through Commissioner, Sanskrit Education Department, Second Floor, Block-6, Shiksha Sankul, JLN Marg, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 3. The Joint Director, Directorate of Sanskrit Education Rajasthan, Second Floor, Block-6, Shiksha Sankul, JLN Marg, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 4. Government Varisht Upadhyay Sanskrit School, Through Principal, Government Varishth Upadhyay Sanskrit School, Hathoj, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ajatshatru Mina Mr. Movil Jeenwal Mr. Vikram Verma For Respondent(s) : Ms. Manju Joshi with Ms. Deepa Singh HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA Order 23/09/2025 1. Matter has come up on an application (IA No.1/2025) filed for placing departmental charge-sheet on record in pursuance of the order dated 19.05.2025. 2. For reasons mentioned in the application (IA No.1/2025), the same is allowed. Documents annexed with the application are taken on record. 3. The prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner during the course of arguments is that he has already filed the representation (Annexure-P/6) in the Office of respondent No.3- [2025:RJ-JP:39251] (2 of 2) [CW-7562/2025] The Joint Director, Directorate of Sanskrit Education Rajasthan, Second Floor, Block-6, Shiksha Sankul, JLN Marg, Jaipur, but the same has not been decided as yet. He further submits that he would be satisfied if: the respondent No.3 is directed to decide the representation filed by the petitioner in a time bound manner. 4. Heard and considered the submissions made at bar. 5. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the respondent No.3 is directed to decide the representation dated 18.09.2024 (Annexure-6) filed by the petitioner, preferably within a period of eight (8) weeks from today by a speaking order, strictly in accordance with law. 6. It is made clear that the aforesaid direction to decide such representation has been issued only with a view to ensure an expeditious redressal of the petitioner’s grievance. The same shall not be construed to be an order to decide the representation in a particular manner. 7. Furthermore, it is needless to say that after adjudication of the representation, if any cause of action still survives, the petitioner would be at liberty to avail further remedies available under the law. 8. In view of the above, the present writ petition stands disposed of. 9. Other pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. (MANEESH SHARMA),J SOURAV /157