[2025:RJ-JP:8666] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19020/2024 Soji Mali Son Of Late Shri Kistura Mali, Aged About 50 Years, Resident Of Village Banstorda, Post Badagav Server, Tehsil Bonli, District Sawai Madhopur (Raj). ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Elementary Education Department (Sanskrit Shiksha), Government Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. The Director, Directorate Sanskrit Education, Second Floor, Block 6, Shiksha Sankul, Jln Marg, Jaipur (Raj). 3. The Joint Director, Directorate, Sanskirt Education, Second Floor, Block 6, Shiksha Sankul, Jln Marg, Jaipur (Raj). ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. RK Gouttam For Respondent(s) : JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 27/02/2025 1. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the earlier writ petition submitted by the petitioner bearing SB Civil Writ Petition No.14559/2009 was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 04.08.2011 with directions to the respondents to grant him consequential benefits, if he stands in merit and otherwise eligible for appointment. Counsel submits that in pursuance of the aforesaid order passed by this Court, appointment was given to the petitioner, but consequential benefits were not accorded, hence, under these [2025:RJ-JP:8666] (2 of 3) [CW-19020/2024] circumstances, the petitioner submitted several representations before the respondents, but in-spite of passing of considerable time, till date, grievance of the petitioner has not been redressed, hence, under these circumstances, he has approached this Court by way of filing this petition with the following prayer: "a) The Hon'ble Court may kindly be declare illegal and arbitrary action of the respondents by which respondents not granted consequential benefits to the petitioner from the date when the other candidates have been accorded appointment under recruitment dated 20.06.2008 on the post of teacher grade-III, subject Sanskrit; b) May kindly be issue direction to the respondents to grant the consequential benefits to petitioner as per the order dated 04.08.2011 passed in SB CWP No.14559/2009 wrongly mentioned in order; c) Any other order or direction which this Hon'ble court deems just and proper may also be passed in favour of the petitioner." 2. In the considered opinion of this Court, the respondents were expected to decide the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law by passing a reasoned speaking order. 3. This Court in the case of Pawan Meena versus State of Rajasthan in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1665/2024 decided on 02.02.2024, has issued specific directions to all the concerned departments to decide the representation of the aggrieved person within a stipulated time, by passing reasoned speaking orders. In pursuance of the orders passed by this Court in the case of Pawan Meena (supra), a separate order has also been issued by the authorities for [2025:RJ-JP:8666] (3 of 3) [CW-19020/2024] deciding the representation, in-spite of above, the representation submitted by the petitioner has not been disposed of by the respondents for the reasons best known to them. 4. In view of the above, the instant writ petition stands disposed of with directions to the respondents to decide the representation of the petitioner strictly in accordance with law, expeditiously as early as possible, by passing a reasoned speaking order, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 5. The stay application and all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J KuD/65