[2025:RJ-JP:28287] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10532/2025 M/s Dara Chemicals, Having Regd. Office At Khatoni No. 212, 117, Khevat No. 175, 99 Murabba No. 72, Thedi Baba Sawan Singh, District Sirsa (Haryana) Through Its Partner Sushil Kumar ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Agriculture, Pant Krishi Bhawan, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur (Raj.) 2. Commissioner (Agriculture), Department Of Agriculture, Jaipur (Raj.) 3. Joint Director (Agriculture) (Quality Control), Agriculture Commissionerate, Jaipur (Raj.) 4. Agriculture Officer (Agriculture), Kale Khan Bagh Kishangarhbas, Alwar - 301405 (Raj.) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Tanay Jain JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 28/07/2025 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that sample of certain fertilizers were taken from their premises which have been alleged to be sub-standard. Counsel submits that as per the provisions contained under Section 32-A of the Fertiliser (Inorganic, Organic or Mixed) (Control) Order, 1985, there is a provision to submit an application for reanalysis of the sample. Counsel submits that immediately after the aforesaid sample process, an application in this regard was submitted to the Commissioner (Agriculture), Department of Agriculture on [2025:RJ-JP:28287] (2 of 3) [CW-10532/2025] 27.10.2023, but till date, no orders have been passed rather te said application submitted by the petitioner has been treated as appeal against the show-cause notice, in fact, no appeal has been preferred by the petitioner against any show-cause notice. Counsel submits that the application/representation of the petitioner seeking prayer of reanalysis has not been decided by the Authorities concerned, hence, appropriate orders be passed. 2. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on record. 3. Considering the arguments put forward by learned counsel for the petitioner and looking to the limited prayer as well as looking to the fact that the application submitted by the petitioner seeking request for re-testing of the sample is lying pending for its adjudication on its merits before the Commissioner (Agriculture) since October, 2023 and considerable time has passed thereafter. 4. In the considered opinion of this Court, it is not expected from the Commissioner (Agriculture) to keep the application pending for an indefinite time. Considering the above, the instant writ petition stands disposed of by issuing direction to the Commissioner (Agricultre) to decide the application (pending, if any) expeditiously as early as possible, preferably within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. 5. Before parting with this order, it is made clear that this Court has not issued any order/ direction to the Commissioner (Agricultre) to decide the same in a particular way, he would be at liberty to decide the same, strictly in accordance with law. [2025:RJ-JP:28287] (3 of 3) [CW-10532/2025] 6. Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Aayush Sharma /47