[2025:RJ-JP:36250] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13372/2025 Ms. Suman Devi D/o Late Shri Dhannaram, Aged About 46 Years, R/o Bidoli, Tehsil Gramin, District Sikar, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Mr. Dharampal Alias Dharmendra S/o Late Shri Dhannaram, Residing At Bidoli, Tehsil Gramin, District Sikar, Rajasthan. 2. Mrs. Kasturi Devi W/o Late Shri Dhannaram, Residing At Bidoli, Tehsil Gramin, District Sikar, Rajasthan. 3. Mr. Laxman Ram S/o Late Shri Tikuram, Residing At Bidoli, Tehsil Gramin, District Sikar, Rajasthan. 4. Learned Sub-Divisional Officer, Dhod, District- Sikar. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Ms.Megha Singh JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 09/09/2025 1. By way of filing this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking direction to the Sub-Divisional Officer to decide the pending suit bearing No.276/2013 expeditiously within a time frame. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the suit for declaration, partition and injunction submitted by the petitioner before the Court of Sub-Divisional Officer is lying pending for its adjudication since last more than 12 years. Counsel submits that after completion of pleadings and recording the evidence of both the sides, the case was posted for final arguments, but in spite of passing of considerable time, when the suit was not decided, the petitioner approached the Board of Revenue for seeking [2025:RJ-JP:36250] (2 of 3) [CW-13372/2025] appropriate direction. Counsel submits that the Board of Revenue vide its order dated 28.10.2022 directed the Sub-Divisional Officer to decide the pending suit expeditiously within a period of two months, but in spite of above, when no steps were taken by the Sub-Divisional Officer, the contempt petition was filed by the petitioner before the Board, however, the same was rejected by the Board vide order dated 30.12.2024. 3. Counsel submits that looking to the issue involved in the matter and looking to the age of the litigation, i.e., more than 12 years, appropriate directions be issued to the Sub-Divisional Officer to decide the pending suit expeditiously as early as possible. 4. Heard and considered the submission made at the Bar and perused the material available on record. 5. Perusal of the record indicates that the suit filed by the petitioner is lying pending for its adjudication before the Court of Sub-Divisional Officer since last more than 12 years. The case was posted for final arguments more than two and half years ago and thereafter, several dates were posted from one date to another, but in spite of above, the suit has not been decided. 6. In the considered opinion of this Court, once the case is posted for final arguments, it is the duty of the Court concerned to decide the suit expeditiously and the Court concerned cannot defer the matter from one date to another for an indefinite period for hearing final arguments. 7. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the present case, this Court deems it just and proper to dispose of the instant writ petition by issuing direction to the Sub-Divisional [2025:RJ-JP:36250] (3 of 3) [CW-13372/2025] Officer to decide the pending suit expeditiously as early as possible preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, strictly in accordance with law. 5. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. Stay application as well as all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Aayush Sharma /39