Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 47730 (RAJ)

STATE OF RAJASTHAN v. SIVA KHAN D/O SHRI M.D. SHARIF KHAN WIFE OF SHRI NAEEM KHAN

SAW/428/2024 · 2025-11-03

Baljinder Singh Sandhu, Sanjeev Prakash Sharma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:44086-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 428/2024 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Department Of Medical And Health Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Director, Medical And Health Services, Directorate C- Scheme, Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Appellants Versus Siva Khan D/o Shri M.d. Sharif Khan Wife Of Shri Naeem Khan, Aged About 51 Years, Resident Of 60-61, Pragati Nagar Progressive Coaching Ke Pass, Police Line, Kota, Rajasthan. ----Respondent For Appellant(s) : Mr. Vigyan Shah, AAG assisted by Mr. Sankalp Vijay For Respondent(s) : Mr. Pradeep Singh HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU Order 03/11/2025 1. The appeal is barred by 448 days. 2. It is stated that against the same order, another appeal i.e. D.B. Special Appeal Writ No.434/2024 (State of Rajasthan and Anr. Vs. Vinod Kumar Dhodria and Ors.) came up before this Court, which too was barred by 448 days and the Court after considering the contents of the application, which are similar in the present appeal too, passed following order: “3. The contents of the application show that even though the copy of the judgment was received in the Directorate of Medical and Health Services on 02.02.2023, the matter remained pending in the office from one table to the other without any substantial progress, apparently due to negligence and indolence on the part of the leading officials, therefore, no case is made out. [2025:RJ-JP:44086-DB] (2 of 2) [SAW-428/2024] 4. Application for condonation of delay is accordingly rejected. 5. Appeal is also dismissed being barred by limitation. 6. The State would be at liberty to take appropriate disciplinary action against those erring officials due to whose negligence, the appeal could not be filed in time.” 3. Accordingly, application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal is dismissed. Consequently, the appeal is also dismissed being barred by limitation. (BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU),J (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),ACTING CJ N.GANDHI/RAJAT/30