[2025:RJ-JP:44746] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13708/2025 Urmila Gurjar W/o Hariram Gurjar, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Gurjar Basti, Ranipura, Bundi, Raj. ----Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariate, Jaipur. 2. Chief Exeuctive Officer, Jila Parishad Bundi. 3. Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Hindoli, Distt. Bundi. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sajid Ali For Respondent(s) : Mr. Kapil Prakash Mathur, AAG, Mr. Anjali Ranga, Mr. Pranay Sharma, Mr. Sumit Purohit Mr. Anshul Ranga HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEET PUROHIT Order 07/11/2025 By way of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has challenged the order dated 18.11.2024 as well as subsequent proceedings initiated on the basis of complaint (Ann.1). Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order impugned dated 18.11.2024 for constituting fact finding committee has been passed on the bassis of complaint (Annx.1), which is an unambiguous complaint and the same does not contain the name and identity of the complainant. Learned counsel [2025:RJ-JP:44746] (2 of 4) [CW-13708/2025] for the petitioner relied upon Circular dated 14.08.2014 issued by the respondent-department wherein directions have been given not to entertain complaints filed with false name and address or where the identity of the complainant is not disclosed. Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that complaint (Annx.1) no where contains the name and identity of any of the villagers and therefore, the non-compliance of the Circular dated 14.08.2014 is apparent on the face of record. A reply to writ petition has been filed on the behalf of the respondents stating therein that as a matter of fact, the villagers of Gram Panchayat, Ranipura, Panchayati Samiti Hindoli, District Bundi has approached to the Minister, Panchayati Raj Department and submitted a joint complaint, levelling allegations regarding illegalities committed by the petitioner – Sarpanch. While taking cognizance of said complaint so submitted by the delegation of the villagers, the Minister, Pachayati Raj Department while appending a remark on the said complaint (Annx.1), has forwarded the same to the Department for taking appropriate action and in pursuance thereof, the order impugned dated 18.11.2024 has been passed. Learned counsel AAG – Mr. Kapil Prakash Mathur alsdo stated that no specific allegation / averment made in the writ petition that such a delegation of the villagers has not met with the Minister concerned and the remarks made by the Minister concerned are forged one. Therefore the complaint in question cannot be said to be an anonymous complaint and the circular dated 14.08.14 is not applicable in the present case. Learned counsel for the respondents further stated that as a matter of fact no adverse order to the interest of petitioner has [2025:RJ-JP:44746] (3 of 4) [CW-13708/2025] been passed till now and only a fact finding inquiry has been proposed, which is still ongoing. Thus, no legal right of the petitioner has been violated and the present writ petition is absolutely premature. Heard learned counsel for both the parties. Upon examination of the record, this Court observes that although the complaint in question does not bear the signature of any complainant, the petitioner has not denied the statement made in the reply that a delegation of villagers personally met and submitted the complaint to the concerned Minister, who thereafter forwarded it to the Department for appropriate action. The writ petition does not contain any allegation that the complaint document (Annexure 1) or the forwarding remarks appended thereto are forged. The circular dated 14.08.2014 pertains to cases involving complaints made under false or fictitious names and addresses, or those sent anonymously by post, which is not the situation in the present matter. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that the complaint in question cannot be treated as an anonymous one. This court also finds that as such no order adverse to the interest of the petitioner is passed. Also, the order for constituting fact finding committee was issued on 18.11.2024 however the present writ petition has been filed after a lapse of 10 months in the month of September, 2025. No reason / explanation for filing the writ petition on a belated stage is mentioned in the writ petition. The Circular dated 14.08.2014 is not statutory in nature but issued only to prescribe guidelines to deal with anonymous [2025:RJ-JP:44746] (4 of 4) [CW-13708/2025] complaints. Therefore also, the fact finding inquiry as ordered moreso looking to the gravity of the allegations levelled against the petitioner cannot be interfered with by this Court. In view of the discussion made above, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the peculiar facts of the present case and therefore, the writ petition is hereby dismissed. It is expected from the State Government to comply with the Circular 14.08.2024 strictly in appropriate cases. Stay application and any other pending application, if any, also stand disposed of. (SANJEET PUROHIT),J TN/39