[2025:RJ-JP:40799] (1 of 3) [CW-14448/2025] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14448/2025 1. Sandeep Manju S/o Shri Ramsingh Manju, Aged About 45 Years, R/o- Bhurasar Ka Baas, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan 2. Kuldeep Manju S/o Shri Ramsingh Manju, Aged About 40 Years, R/o- Bhurasar Ka Baas, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan 3. Pradeep Manju S/o Shri Ramsingh Manju, Aged About 42 Years, R/o- Bhurasar Ka Baas, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan 4. Jagdeep Manju S/o Shri Ramsingh Manju, Aged About 38 Years, R/o- Bhurasar Ka Baas, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan ----Petitioners Versus 1. The Director, Local Self Government Department, Government Of Rajasthan, G-3, Rajmahal Residential Area, C-Scheme, Near Civil Lines Phatak, Jaipur-302016, Rajasthan. 2. Nagar Parishad, Jhunjhunu, Road No. 1, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan- 333001 Through Its Commissioner. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mudit Singhvi, Adv for Mr. Vineet Mehta, Adv. For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEET PUROHIT Order 08/10/2025 1. A limited prayer has been made by the petitioners seeking direction for expeditious disposal of their statutory appeal pending consideration before respondent No.1 since one year. It is submitted that the patta issued in favour of the petitioners on 21.06.2013 was cancelled vide order dated 05.07.2024 while exercising the powers under Section 73-B of the Rajasthan [2025:RJ-JP:40799] (2 of 3) [CW-14448/2025] Municipalities Act, 2009 (for short “the Act of 2009”). Against the said order of cancellation of patta, the petitioners have preferred the statutory appeal provided under Section 73-B (4) of the Act of 2009. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners has also drawn attention of this Court towards the order sheets showing that appeal has been filed on 18.07.2024, yet no substantial proceedings have been undertaken. Moreover, on thirteen different occasions, time was granted to the respondents for filing the reply. Learned counsel for the petitioners also submits that the manner in which the proceedings of appeal have taken place, has rendered the provisions of statutory remedy nugatory. The petitioners have not prayed for adjudication on merits but made a limited prayer for expeditious disposal of their pending appeal. 3. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners. 4. Where Section 73-B (4) provides remedy of appeal, Section 73-B (6) of the Act of 2009, clearly casts duty upon the appellate authority that every appeal so filed under Sub-Section 4 shall be disposed of as expeditiously as possible. 5. A perusal of the order-sheets related to the present case clearly shows that no effective efforts have been made by the Appellate Authority to ensure compliance of Section 73-B (6) of the Act of 2009. The petitioners’ right to expeditious disposal and speedy justice, which is part of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, has thus been violated and if such approach is permitted, the same would render the provision of the statutory remedy inefficacious. [2025:RJ-JP:40799] (3 of 3) [CW-14448/2025] 6. The legal framework embodied in the Act underscores the imperative of prompt and effective adjudication of statutory appeals by the appellate authority. Therefore, the appellate authority must make every possible endeavour to ensure that the legislative provisions is implemented in its true spirit, to the extent practicable. The legislative intent behind the incorporation of such a provision is clear, and unless statutory appeals are adjudicated within a reasonable timeframe, the very objectives of the enactment would stand defeated. 7. Therefore, this Court is inclined to accept the limited prayer so made by learned counsel for the petitioners. 8. The Appellate Authority is directed to decide the appeal No.F-53 (3278) Nig./DLB/24 (Sandeep Manju and Ors. Vs. Municipal Council, Jhunjhunu) filed by the petitioners as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, in accordance with law. 9. In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed of accordingly. 10. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. (SANJEET PUROHIT),J AVINASH GULERIA /10