[2025:RJ-JP:6855] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19134/2024 Ramswaroop Mali S/o Moolchand Mali, R/o Piplai Tehsil Bamanwas, Distt. Sawai Madhopur, Raj. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary To The Food And Civil Supply Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Addl. District Collector, Sawai Madhopur. 3. District Supply Officer, Food And Civil Supply Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Sawai Madhopur. 4. Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Bamanwas, District Sawai Madhopur. 5. Tehsildar, Tehsil Bamanwas, District Sawai Madhopur. ----Respondents Connected With S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19135/2024 Tarachand S/o Moolchand, R/o Peeplai, Tehsil Bamanwas, Dist. Sawai Madhopur, Raj. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary To The Food And Civil Supply Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Addl. District Collector, Sawai Madhopur. 3. District Supply Officer, Food And Civil Supply Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Sawai Madhopur. 4. Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Bamanwas, District Sawai Madhopur. 5. Tehsildar, Tehsil Bamanwas, District Sawai Madhopur. ----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19160/2024 Shyamlal Vaishnav S/o Dwarka Prasad, R/o Khedli Thana, Bamanwas, Dist. Sawai Madhopur, Raj. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary To The Food And Civil Supply Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Addl. District Collector, Sawai Madhopur. 3. District Supply Officer, Food And Civil Supply Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Sawai Madhopur. 4. Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Bamanwas, [2025:RJ-JP:6855] (2 of 3) [CW-19134/2024] District Sawai Madhopur. 5. Tehsildar, Tehsil Bamanwas, District Sawai Madhopur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Harshita Sharma Ms. Vibhu Sakshi Sharma for Dr. Mahesh Sharma For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL Order 17/02/2025 1. In all three writ petitions, issue involved is identical in nature, hence, with the consent of counsel for petitioners, all three writ petitions have been heard together and would stand decided by this common order. 2. For convenience, the facts from S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19134/2024 are being taken into consideration. 3. It has been stated that petitioner was dealer of a fair price shop of Food and Civil Supply Department and he was saddled with an allegation that he sold the wheat in the open market, which was required to be distributed in the Drought Relief Programme (SGRY Scheme). On this count, after issuing show cause notice dated 10.07.2020 and giving opportunity of hearing, the Additional District Collector, Sawai Madhopur, passed the judgment dated 02.12.2022, allowing to proceed for recovery of an amount of Rs.14,58,388.80/- from petitioner under the Rajasthan Public Demands Recovery Act, 1952 (for short, “the Act of 1952”), whereagainst petitioner has preferred the instant writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. [2025:RJ-JP:6855] (3 of 3) [CW-19134/2024] 4. Counsel for petitioners submits that in furtherance to the judgment dated 02.12.2022, passed by the Additional District Collector, recovery notices have also been issued subsequently. 5. This Court finds that against the impugned judgments passed by Additional District Collector, petitioners have an alternative and statutory remedy of filing of appeal under Section 23A of the Act of 1952, before the Revenue Appellate Authority. Petitioners have not availed the alternate and statutory remedy of appeal, rather invoked writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In the opinion of this Court, the dispute involved herein otherwise intrinsically attached with the disputed questions of facts. Thus, it would not be just and proper to exercise the writ jurisdiction by this Court against the impugned judgment. 6. As a result, without expressing opinion on merits/ demerits against the impugned judgment, in the exercise of the writ jurisdiction by this Court, petitioners are relegated to avail the statutory remedy of appeal as available to them under Section 23A of the Act of 1952. However, it is hereby observed that in case, any appeal is filed by petitioners within a period of 30 days from today, the Appellate Authority shall make an endeavor to hear and decide the appeal on merits, condoning the delay in filing the appeal by applying Section 14 of the Limitation Act read with Section 23A of the Act of 1952. 7. With the aforesaid directions, the writ petitions are hereby disposed of. 8. All pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of. (SUDESH BANSAL),J RONAK JAIMAN/33-35