Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 25925 (RAJ)

ZAHOOR AHMED S/O ABDUL MAJID v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

SAW/913/2025 · 2025-08-01

Chandra Prakash Shrimali, Sanjeev Prakash Sharma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:29387-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 913/2025 In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6966/2023 Zahoor Ahmed S/o Abdul Majid, R/o Suket Tehsil Ramganjmandi, District Kota. ----Appellant Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Deputy Mining Secretary, Secretariat, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur (Raj.) 2. The Addl. Director (Mines), Kota Zone, District Kota. 3. The Superintending Mining Engineer, Kota Circle, District Kota. 4. The Mining Engineer, Ramganjmandi Kota Circle, District Kota. ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. R.S. Mehta with Ms. Pallavi Mehta For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SHRIMALI Judgment 01/08/2025 1. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that law has been all settled by this Court or by the Hon’ble Apex Court, however, the learned Single Judge had not remanded the matter back to the Appellate Authority to decide the appeal/revision afresh. 2. We are afraid that we would not accept the contention as submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant. Once the learned Single Judge has reached to the conclusion that the [2025:RJ-JP:29387-DB] (2 of 2) [SAW-913/2025] Appellate/Revisional Authority has failed to take notice of the submissions raised and the legal position as set up by the writ petitioner before it, the only remedy available before the Hon’ble Single Judge was to remand the matter back to the Appellate Authority to pass a reasoned and speaking order which he has done. In fact, there is apparently no case for entertaining their appeal as the learned Single Judge has also directed to decide the appeal preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of advance copy. 3. In view thereto, this appeal is wholly misconceived and same is accordingly, dismissed. The order passed by the learned Single Judge is to be implemented. 4. The matter is to be decided by the Revisional Authority within a period of three weeks. (CHANDRA PRAKASH SHRIMALI),J (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J GAURAV/19