[2025:RJ-JP:10330] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3300/2025 Sarjeet Singh Yadav S/o Bakhtavar Singh Yadav, Aged About 60 Years, R/o Ward No. 16, Kamla Colony, Khairthal District Khairthal- Tijara, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Additional Chief Secretary, Department Of Water Resources, Government Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur. 2. The Additional Chief Secretary, Finance Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 3. The Secretary And Commissioner, Panchayati Raj Department, Rajasthan Secretariat, Jaipur. 4. The Director, Directorate Of Pension And Pensioners Welfare, Rajasthan, Jaipur. 5. The Chief Engineer, Water Resource Department, Indira Gandhi Nahar Pariyojna Bhawan, Bhawani Singh Road, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ram Pratap Saini, Adv. For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Judgment 07/03/2025 Learned counsel for the petitioner could not refute that the petitioner would be covered under the definition of ‘government servant’, as prescribed under Section 2(c) of Rajasthan Civil Services (Service Matters Appellate Tribunals) Act 1976 (for short “Act of 1976”), nor could the learned counsel for the petitioner refute that the lis in question also falls under the ‘service matters’, [2025:RJ-JP:10330] (2 of 2) [CW-3300/2025] as defined under Section 2(f) of the Act of 1976. In view thereof, since the petitioner has an alternative and efficacious remedy available in law, the learned counsel for the petitioner has prayed for withdrawal of the present petition with liberty to approach the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal (for short “RAT”) for redressal of his grievance. Considering the oral prayer, the present petition stands disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the RAT for redressal of his grievance. If the petitioner files appropriate petition before the RAT within a period of 30 days, the RAT shall adjudicate the same on merits as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months. Needless to say, no prejudice to be caused to the petitioner based on any observations made hereinabove. Registry (RAT) is directed to act as per the directions spelled out in SBCWP No. 2335/2025 titled as Mohammad Kasif vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. The writ petition stands disposed of in above terms. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (SAMEER JAIN),J CHANDAN /177