[2025:RJ-JP:46330] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12913/2025 Sunil Meena S/o Giriraj Meena, Aged About 18 Years, R/o Village Jajawar Tehsil Nainwa, District Bundi ----Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur 2. Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan Bikaner 3. Zila Parishad Bundi, Through Chief Executive Officer, 4. District Education Officer (H.q.), Elementary, Bundi 5. Chief Block Education Officer, Elementary Education Nainwa, District Bundi 6. Principal, Govt. Sr. Secondary School Jajawar, District Bundi ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Saini Mr. Amitesh Rana For Respondent(s) : Ms. Anshul Ranga on behalf of Mr. Kapil Prakash Mathur, AAG Mr. Saumil Sharma on behalf of Mr. Gopal Krishan Sharma, AGC HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 17/11/2025 1. The instant civil writ petition is preferred by the petitioner with following prayer:- “i) by an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof the impugned order dated 9.5.2025 & 26.5.2025 issued by the respondents may kindly be quashed and set aside ii) by an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof the respondents may kindly be directed to give compassionate appointment to the [2025:RJ-JP:46330] (2 of 3) [CW-12913/2025] petitioner on the suitable post according to his qualification at the place of his Late father by granting relaxation in delay cause in submitting the application with all consequential benefit. iii) Any other order which this Hon’ble Court deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be passed in favour of the petitioner.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that due to death of his father on 16.04.2014, the petitioner after attaining adulthood, filed an application for compassionate appointment in place of his father but the Department has refused to appoint him in place of his father, without any justifiable reason. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the respondents have not assigned any specific reason for rejecting the candidature of the present petitioner. 4. Issue notice to the respondents. 5. Ms. Anshul Ranga on behalf of Mr. Kapil Prakash Mathur, AAG accepts notice for respondent Nos.1 and 3 and Mr. Saumil Sharma on behalf of Mr. Gopal Krishan Sharma, AGC accepts notice for respondent Nos.2, 4 to 6. 6. Office is directed to reflect name of Mr. Kapil Prakash Mathur, AAG and Mr. Gopal Krishan Sharma, AGC in the cause list as counsel for the respondents. 7. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, it is appropriate to dispose of the present writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to submit a representation to the respondents which shall be considered in accordance with the prevalent rules and the grounds as raised by the petitioner in the present writ petition. [2025:RJ-JP:46330] (3 of 3) [CW-12913/2025] 8. Considered the grievance raised herein, the petitioner is given a liberty to submit a representation to the respondents- Authority within a period of 30 days raising all grounds and the respondents-Authority are directed to consider and decide the representation after enquiry about grievances, raised by the petitioner but in case of deviation, with a reasoned and speaking order within a period of 30 days from date of receipt of representation. After passing the order, the respondents are under an obligation to communicate the decision to the petitioner either by way of speed post or through E-mail, if petitioner has provided E-mail in his representation. If the petitioner is still aggrieved, he is at liberty to approach this Court with fresh petition. 9. With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petition with pending application, if any, stands disposed of. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J MR/17