Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 37691 (RAJ)

RAJESH KUMAR CHOUDHARY S/O SHRI RAM LAL CHOUDHARY v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CW/16114/2025 · 2025-11-03

Ashok Kumar Jain

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:44266] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16114/2025 Rajesh Kumar Choudhary S/o Shri Ram Lal Choudhary, Resident Of Village Besariya, Tehsil Uniara, District Tonk (Rajasthan). ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Department Of Panchayati Raj, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur. 2. District Collector, District-Tonk, Rajasthan. 3. Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Bosaria, Tehsil- Uniara, District- Tonk, Rajasthan. 4. Village Development Officer, Gram Panchayat Bosaria, Tehsil- Uniara, District- Tonk, Rajasthan. 5. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Tonk, Rajasthan. 6. Project Manager, Hg Infra Engineering Ltd., Bisalpur Project, Tonk, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Lakhan Singh Meena Mr. Vikram Shishwal For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 03/11/2025 1. Instant writ petition is preferred by the petitioner with following prayer:- “1. Direct the respondents to consider the petitioner for appointment to the post of Tap Water Friend (Jal Mitra) under the Jal Jeevan Mission in Bisalpur Project, Tonk, with due preference as per departmental circular/notification. [2025:RJ-JP:44266] (2 of 3) [CW-16114/2025] 2. Quash and set aside the action of the respondents whereby the petitioner has been denied consideration/preference for appointment to the post of Pump Operator. 3. Direct the respondents to grant all consequential benefits, including seniority and continuity of service, if appointed. 4. Pass any other order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is entitled for appointment in accordance with the Government notification/circular but the respondents are not considering his candidature for appointment as “Jal Mitra” in the Scheme of the respondents. 3. Having considered submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, this writ petition is disposed of by permitting the petitioner to submit a representation with direction to the respondents to dispose of the same in accordance with previous circulars, rules and guidelines under the Scheme. 4. 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 decide the representation with a reasoned and speaking order within a period of 30 days from date of receipt of representation. After the decision, 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 [2025:RJ-JP:44266] (3 of 3) [CW-16114/2025] petitioner is still aggrieved, he has a liberty to approach this Court with fresh petition. 5. With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petition with pending application, if any, stands disposed of. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J MR/17