Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 25987 (RAJ)

BRIJENDRA SINGH S/O MANGAL SINGH v. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CW/11430/2025 · 2025-08-04

Sameer Jain

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:29684] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11430/2025 1. Brijendra Singh S/o Mangal Singh, Aged About 47 Years, R/o Jat Mohalla, Khoh, Bhartpur, Rajasthan. 2. Rajvir Singh S/o Jagdish Father/o Jagdish, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Jat Mohalla, Po Khoh, Dist. Bhartpur, Rajasthan. 3. Brijesh Saini S/o Hariram Saini, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Panjawi Mohalla, Khoh, Bhartpur, Rajasthan. 4. Pawan Kumar S/o Saheb Singh, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Tek Mohalla, Khoh, Bhartpur, Rajasthan. ----Petitioners Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Higher And Technical Education Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur- 302005. 2. The Commissioner, Commissionerate Of College Education, Block-4, R.k.s. Sankul, Jln Road, Jaipur- 302015, Rajasthan. 3. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, (Group-3), Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur- 302005. 4. The Principal (Nodal Principal), Shaheed Jeetram Government College, Nagar, District Deeg, Rajasthan. 5. The District Collector And District Magistrate, District Deeg, Rajasthan- 321203 6. The Sub- Divisional Officer (Sdo), Sub- Division Deeg, District Deeg, Rajasthan. 7. The Tehsildar, Tehsil Deeg, District Deeg, Rajasthan. 8. The Director, Rajasthan State Higher Education Council, Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Avinash Dhanju, Adv. For Respondent(s) : [2025:RJ-JP:29684] (2 of 2) [CW-11430/2025] HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Judgment 04/08/2025 Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that at the time of deceleration of manifesto/ annual budget allocation the public representatives have given an impression that the College/University will be established at a specific place. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, having heard the arguments advanced by the counsel representing the petitioner, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the present petition with liberty to the petitioner to raise all his grievance along with village residents, if they so chose, for which audience be given by the concerned Collector and competent public representatives. In light of above, the present petition is disposed of with an expectation from the public office to give audience to the petitioner and village residents. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed. (SAMEER JAIN),J CHANDAN /67