[2025:RJ-JP:41646] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9939/2025 1. Ashok Kumar S/o late Shri Kailash Chand, aged about 58 Years, 2. Naresh Kumar S/o late Shri Kailash Chand, aged about 50 Years, 3. Suman Gupta D/o late Shri Kailash Chand, aged about 45 Years, All residents of Mohalla Buchaheda, Ward No. 9, Kasba Kotputli, District Jaipur (Raj.) ----Petitioners Versus 1. Municipal Board, Kotputli through the Chief Municipal Officer/Executive Officer 2. Chief Municipal Officer/ Executive Officer, Municipal Board, Kotputli 3. Chairman, Municipal Board, Kotputli, District Jaipur (Raj.) 4. Director, Local Self Department, Jaipur, District Jaipur (Raj.) 5. Mahesh Kumar S/o Mange Lal Choudhary, R/o Mohalla Buchaheda, Old Ward No.17, New Ward No.9, Kotputli, District Jaipur (Raj.) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ajay Gupta For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA Order 13/10/2025 1. By way of filing this writ petition, a prayer has been made for issuing directions to the learned Civil Judge & Judicial Magistrate, Kotputli, District Jaipur to decide the Civil Suit No.121/2016 expeditiously. [2025:RJ-JP:41646] (2 of 2) [CW-9939/2025] 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case is pending before the learned Trial Court for its adjudication since 2016 and nine years have passed, so appropriate directions be issued to the learned Trial Court to decide the said suit in time bound manner i.e. within a period of six months. 3. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on the record. 4. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sangram Sadashiv Suryavanshi vs. State of Maharashtra1 while relying on the constitutional Bench judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in High Court Bar Association, Allahabad vs. State of U.P.2, has deprecated the practice of the Courts of issuing directions to the subordinate Courts to decide the matter in a timeline. 5. The aforesaid directions, as prayed for, cannot be issued by this Court. But looking at the fact that the case is pending before the learned Trial Court for its adjudication since 2016; and evidence of the petitioner has not been started as yet. Therefore, it is expected from the learned Trial Court to make all possible endeavours to decide the suit expeditiously while ensuring that no unnecessary and unreasonable request for adjournment is entertained. 6. Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of. 7. All pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (MANEESH SHARMA),J DEEPA-20 1 2024 SCC Online SC 3526 2 2024 INSC 150