[2025:RJ-JP:34316] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12968/2025 Suresh Chand Gupta S/o Amarlal Gupta, Aged About 81 Years, R/o Bambori Ghata, Chhipabarod, Distt. Baran, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Rural Department, Development And Panchayati Raj Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Director, Panchayati Raj Deptt., Govt. Secre-Tariat, Jaipur. 3. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Baran. 4. Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Chhabra, Baran. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Sunil Kumar Jain Ms.Shobha Sharma JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 28/08/2025 1. By way of filing this writ petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned notices dated 12.05.2025 and 02.06.2025 issued by the Panchayat Samiti Chhabra Dist. Baran by which the petitioner has been directed to deposit the arrears and the outstanding rent, failing which proceedings would be initiated against him under the provisions of the Public Demands Recovery Act, 1952. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on earlier occasion also similar notices were issued to the petitioner, hence, under those circumstances, the petitioner approached this Court by way of filing S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5315/2001 and the same was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 31.01.2024 granting liberty to the petitioner to file an appropriate application [2025:RJ-JP:34316] (2 of 4) [CW-12968/2025] along-with relevant receipts of deposition of rent before the Authority concerned and the respondents were directed to decide the said application, after affording the opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, strictly in accordance with law. 3. Counsel submits that a clear and specific direction was issued to the respondents to decide the application of the petitioner within a period of three months. 4. Counsel submits that pursuant to the aforesaid order, the petitioner submitted two different applications in the Office of respondents along-with copy of rent receipts, the said application was submitted on 11.11.2024 and 16.05.2025, but without deciding the application submitted by the petitioner pursuant to the order dated 31.01.2024 passed by this Court, the respondents have issued the above two notices to the petitioner asking him to deposit the arrears of the rent. 5. Counsel submits that the rent is regularly paid by the petitioner and there are no arrears or outstanding due against him, hence, interference of this court is warranted. 6. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on record. 7. Considering the arguments put forward by learned counsel for the petitioner and looking to the fact that when in the earlier round of litigation submitted by the petitioner, the writ petition bearing S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5315/2001 was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 31.01.2024 with the following observations and directions as follows: “1. By way of filing this petition, the petitioner has challenged the orders dated 22.09.2000 and 27.06.2001. By passing the [2025:RJ-JP:34316] (3 of 4) [CW-12968/2025] aforesaid orders the respondents have directed the petitioner to deposit the due amount of arrears of rent. As per the averments in the writ petition the petitioner has deposited the due amount of arrears of the rent till the month of March, 2020. Contents of the petition indicates that the receipt in this regard was also issued by the concerned Panchayat Samiti. 2. Since disputed question of facts are involved whether arrears of rent has been deposited by the petitioner or not. It is a pure question of fact, which can be adjudicated by way of filing appropriate application before the Competent Court. If this is a case of the petitioner that there is no due towards the arrears of rent and the entire rent has been deposited by the petitioner, the petitioner is at liberty to satisfy the authority concerned about the deposit of the due rent of arrears by way of appropriate application along with relevant receipts. 3. The instant writ petition stands disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to submit appropriate application along with the relevant receipts of deposit rent before the authority concerned. The authority concerned is supposed to decide the said application after affording the opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, strictly in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders thereupon. The authority concerned is also directed to decide the application expeditiously as early as possible not beyond the period of three months and thereafter proceed in accordance with law. [2025:RJ-JP:34316] (4 of 4) [CW-12968/2025] 4. Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.” 8. It appears that pursuant to the aforesaid order, the petitioner has submitted two different applications before the respondents, but without deciding those applications on its merits straightaway, the respondents have issued two impugned notices to the petitioner asking him to deposit the arrears of the rent. 9. In the considered opinion of this Court, the respondents are supposed to comply with the direction issued by this Court vide order dated 31.01.2024, they are supposed to decide the application submitted by the petitioner strictly in accordance with law. 10. In view of the above, the instant writ petition stands disposed of reiterating the same direction which was issued on earlier occasions, i.e., 31.01.2024, the respondents are again directed to decide the applications of the petitioner, after affording the opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, strictly in accordance with law and pass appropriate reasoned and speaking orders thereupon, expeditiously as early as possible preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. 11. For a period of three months, no effect to the impugned notices be given. 12. Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Aayush Sharma /7