[2025:RJ-JP:38621] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2178/2025 Hari Ram S/o Chandra Singh, Aged About 46 Years, R/o Gram Shakarpura Post Bhawanipura Tehsil, Hindoli, District Bundi, Ra- jasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through, Secretary, Department Of Local Self Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secre- tariat, Jaipur-302005 2. The Director, Directorate Of Local Self Bodies, Govt. Of Rajasthan, G-3, Rajmahal Residency Area, C-Scheme, Near Civil Lines Phatak, Jaipur-16 (Raj.) 3. Chief Executive Officer, Nagar Palika Nainwa, Bundi, Ra- jasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Hitesh Bagri with Mr. Nadeem Mazahir For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA Order 19/09/2025 1. Though various prayers have been made in the writ petition, learned counsel for the petitioner, upon instructions from his client, submits that the petitioner would be satisfied if; he is permitted to file a representation before respondent No.2 - Director, Directorate Of Local Self Bodies, Government Of Rajasthan. It is prayed that respondent No.2 may be directed to consider and decide such representation with a sympathetic eye, taking into account the fact that the petitioner is a disabled person and economically very poor, encapsulating the grievances raised in [2025:RJ-JP:38621] (2 of 2) [CW-2178/2025] the present writ petition; and if a direction is issued to respondent No.2 to decide the same in a time-bound manner. 4. Heard and considered the submissions made at bar. 5. In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file a representation before respondent No.2 - Director, Directorate Of Local Self Bodies, Government Of Rajasthan, within a period of four (04) weeks from today. Respondent No.2 is directed to decide the said representa- tion within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of filing of such representation by passing a speaking order, strictly in accordance with law. 6. It is made clear that the aforesaid direction to decide the representation has been issued only with a view to ensure expeditious redressal of the petitioner’s grievance. The same shall not be construed as an order to decide the representation in any particular manner. 7. Furthermore, it is needless to say that after adjudication of the representation, if any cause of action still survives, the petitioner would be at liberty to avail further remedies available under the law. 8. In view of the above, the present writ petition stands disposed of. 9. The stay application and other pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of, accordingly. (MANEESH SHARMA),J Seema/7