[2025:RJ-JP:30477] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11592/2025 Chhote Lal Meena S/o Late Shri Roshan Lal Meena, Aged About 57 Years, R/o C-113, Model Town Malviya Nagar, Jaipur. ----Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Chief Secretary, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 2. The Vice-Chancellor Of Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar Law University, Jaipur. 3. Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar Law University, Jaipur Through Its Registrar. 4. Controller Of Examination, Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar Law University, Jaipur. 5. Rajdhani Law College, Bani Park, Jaipur, Through Principal. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Pradeep Mathur JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 07/08/2025 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that before approaching this Court, the petitioner approached the respondents by way of filing a representation dated 22.07.2025 for redressal of his grievances, but for the reasons best known to the authority, the representation submitted by the petitioner has not been decided. 2. Learned counsel further submits that the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Pawan Meena Versus State of Rajasthan (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1665/2024 passed on [2025:RJ-JP:30477] (2 of 2) [CW-11592/2025] 02.02.2024) has directed all the Departments of the State to decide the representation within a stipulated time, but in spite of passing of the said order, till date, the representation submitted by the petitioner has not been decided. 3. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on record. 4. Considering the arguments put forward by learned counsel for the petitioner, the instant writ petition stands disposed of with direction to the respondents to decide the representation (pending, if any) expeditiously as early as possible, preferably within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, by passing a reasoned and speaking order, strictly in accordance with law. 5. Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. 6. Before parting with this order, it is made clear that this Court has not passed any direction/order to the respondents to decide the representation of the petitioner in a particular way. The respondents would be at liberty to decide the same, strictly in accordance with law. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Aayush Sharma /124