[2025:RJ-JP:49721] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19193/2025 Suraj Singh Bairwa Son Of Shri Shankarlal, Aged About 52 Years, Resident Of 127, Sumer Nagar-I, Iscon Road, Mansarovar, Jaipur At Present Posted As Nayab Tehsildar, Tehsil Sanganer, District Jaipur (Rajasthan). ----Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan). 2. The Board Of Revenue, Ajmer Through Its Registrar. 3. The District Collector, Jaipur, Bani Park, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Prahlad Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vidyadhar Gathala, AGC HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 06/12/2025 1. Instant writ petition is preferred by petitioner with following prayer: “i) by an appropriate writ order or direction thereof, thereby, impugned order dated 27.11.2025 passed by the respondent no. 2 (Annexure-14) may kindly be declared illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional, ii) by an appropriate writ order or direction thereof, thereby, the respondents may kindly be directed to revoke the suspension order dated 27.11.2025 immediately and they may also be directed to permit the petitioner in services as Nayab Tehsildar, at [2025:RJ-JP:49721] (2 of 3) [CW-19193/2025] Tehsil Sanganer by granting all consequential benefits. iii) any other appropriate order or direction which the Hon'ble Court may deem just, proper and expedient in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be passed in favour of the Petitioner.” 2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that on the basis of news article, petitioner was suspended by the respondents and during suspension, his Headquarter has been changed to Ajmer. He further submits that petitioner has suffered an accident during course of service and currently he is having pain in his legs and the respondents are under an obligation to consider the plight of the petitioner in wake of physical constraints. He also placed reliance upon judgment in case of Ajay Kumar Choudhary Vs. Union of India Through Its Secretary and Another reported as AIR 2015 SC 2389. 3. Learned counsel for respondent after accepting notice submits that petitioner may submit a representation to the respondents and same shall be considered in accordance with guidelines and circular of DOP. 4. 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 consider and decide the representation in light of ratio laid down in case of reliance upon judgment in case of Ajay Kumar Choudhary Vs. Union of India Through Its [2025:RJ-JP:49721] (3 of 3) [CW-19193/2025] Secretary and Another (supra) but in case of deviation with a reasoned and speaking order within a period of 30 days from date of receipt of representation. After the decision, the respondents are under an obligation to communicate the decision 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 is at liberty to approach this Court with fresh petition. 5. In the meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to mark his presence at Jaipur, till decision of representation. 6. With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petition with pending application, if any, stands disposed of. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J PREETI VALECHA /56