[2025:RJ-JP:46071] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17541/2025 Ashok Kumar Butoliya Son Of Shri Shri Krishan Butoliya, Aged About 56 Years, R/o 4/720, Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur (Rajasthan) ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Home, Government Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Director General Of Police, State Of Rajasthan, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vinod Kumar Singhal Ms. Srishti Kaushik Mr. Bhavya Sharma Mr. Chitransh Trivedi For Respondent(s) : Mr. Bhuwnesh Sharma, AAG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 14/11/2025 1. Instant writ petition is preferred with following prayer:- It is, therefore, prayed that this criminal misc. petition may kindly be allowed and by appropriate order or directions, the impugned order dated 07.11.2025 issued by the respondent No.1 may kindly be quashed and set aside qua the rejection of the candidature of the petitioner for promotion to senior scale against 2023-24 DPC and accordingly, the respondents may kindly be directed the respondents to consider the petitioner for promotion to senior scale in DPC 2023-24 with all consequential benefits in the interest of justice ignoring the punishment order dated 12.08.2024 and accordingly, [2025:RJ-JP:46071] (2 of 3) [CW-17541/2025] the necessary orders in this respect be issued in the favour of the petitioner in the interest of justice. 2. Mr. Bhuwnesh Sharma, AAG accepts notice on behalf of respondents. 3. Office is directed to reflect the name of Mr. Bhuwnesh Sharma, AAG as counsel for respondents. 4. Learned counsel for petitioner while placing reliance upon judgment in case of Dr. Ashok Singhvi Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B. CWP No.10978/2010 (Order dated 04.01.2013), Rajendra Singh Rao Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B. CWP No.8482/2008 (Order dated 19.11.2010) and Jabbar Singh Charan Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B. CWP No.7119/2022 (Order dated 10.05.2023) submits that the case of present petitioner is squarely covered by the judgment as referred by him. He further submits that punishment order passed by the respondents is contrary to the settled proposition of law, therefore, the respondents are bound to consider grounds mentioned in the writ petition of the writ petitioner in light of the ratio as referred by him. 5. Having considered submission of learned counsel for the parties, it is appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to file a representation to the respondents. 6. 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 in light of ratio laid down in case referred hereinabove with a reasoned and speaking order within a period of 30 days from date [2025:RJ-JP:46071] (3 of 3) [CW-17541/2025] of receipt of representation. After passing the order, the respondent is under an obligation to communicate the order 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 has a liberty to approach this Court with fresh petition. 7. With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petition with pending application, if any, stands disposed of. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J GAURAV /189