[2025:RJ-JP:40522] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15274/2025 Smt. Guru Jyoti Saini W/o Shri Govind Ram Saini, aged about 49 Years, R/o Plot No. 332, Gopal Colony, Tonk Road, Sanganer, Jaipur (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus Smt. Jyoti Vadhwani W/o Shri Pushpendra Vadhwani, aged about 37 Years, Proprietor M/s Om Ganpati Enterprises, R/o Plot No. 20, Maruti Colony, Shyopur Road, Pratap Nagar, Sanganer, Jaipur (Raj.) ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. G.P. Sharma For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA Order 06/10/2025 1. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking appropriate direction for early disposal in a time-bound manner of the original application No.119/2023 before the learned Rent Tribunal No.2, Jaipur Metropolitan-I. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon Section 15(5) of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 which prescribes that the Rent Tribunal shall conclude the hearing of proceedings within a period of 180 days from the date of service of notice on the tenant and the petition shall be decided within a period of two hundred and forty days from the date of the service of the notice on the tenant. 3. Heard and considered the submissions made at bar and perused the material available on record. [2025:RJ-JP:40522] (2 of 3) [CW-15274/2025] 4. From a bare perusal of the order-sheets, it is reflected that the present eviction petition was filed in 2023, and the said petition is pending at the initial stage of filing of the rejoinder. From the order sheet of the case, it is evident that the entire blame for the delay cannot be attributed to the respondent alone. Therefore, the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner qua the prescribed time limit under Section 15(5) of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001, cannot be accepted. 5. It is for the learned Rent Tribunal in each case to apply their mind and decide whether the hearing of the petition is to be expedited. Ultimately, it must be left to the judicious exercise of discretion of the concerned Court to determine whether a ground for urgency has been made out. 6. This Court is of the considered view that, in the absence of any statistics regarding the institution, currently pending cases, as well as the data of pending old or targeted cases before the concerned Court, no direction can be passed to decide a particular case on priority. Passing such an order, in the opinion of this Court, would interfere with the normal working of the concerned Court and the corresponding priorities of the other pending matters. 7. However, this Court is also conscious of the fact that there may be other cases such as involving senior citizens, those who are differently abled or people who have a particular disability socio-economic or otherwise which may prime cause of urgent disposal, although the present case does not fall within such parameters to prime cause for urgent disposal, and more [2025:RJ-JP:40522] (3 of 3) [CW-15274/2025] particularly the present eviction petition is merely two years old and pending at the initial stage of filing of the rejoinder. 8. 8. It is pertinent to mention here that nowadays a trend has been set up to file such similar writ petitions for expeditious hearing of eviction petitions without there being any compelling urgency. If such writ petitions are entertained, it would place a class of litigants, who move the Court in a separate and preferential category, whereas other cases, which may be of similar or greater urgency, are left to be decided in the normal channel. 9. Therefore, the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner cannot be granted by this Court in light of the judgment by the Hon'ble Apex Court in 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 10. In that view of the matter, this Court is not inclined to issue a direction to the learned Rent Tribunal to decide the instant eviction petition within a time-bound manner; however, it is expected that the learned Rent Tribunal will not entertain unnecessary and unwarranted requests for adjournment. 11. With the aforesaid direction, the present writ petition is disposed of. 12. All pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (MANEESH SHARMA),J DEEPA-30 1 2024 SCC Online SC 3526 2 2024 INSC 150