[2025:RJ-JP:48189] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16415/2025 Kishan Lal Yadav S/o Babulal Yadav, Aged About 56 Years, R/o Plot No. A-84, Mother Teresa Nagar, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus 1. Jaipur Development Authority, through Secretary, Indira Circle Ke Paas, JLN Marg, Jaipur. 2. Enforcement Officer and Deputy Commissioner, Zone-7, JDA, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Martand Pratap Singh, Mr. Vikram Singh Panwar For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Kuri with Mr. Dharma Ram HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP TANEJA Order 27/11/2025 1. By way of instant writ petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 05.07.2024, whereby the Reference Application No.50/2023 filed by the petitioner before the learned JDA Appellate Tribunal (for short "the Tribunal") was dismissed in default. The petitioner is also aggrieved by the subsequent order dated 11.08.2025 passed by the learned Tribunal, whereby his application seeking restoration of the Reference Application was also dismissed on the ground that the same was filed beyond the prescribed period of 30 days. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has a strong case on merits. He further submits that by order dated 13.02.2023, the learned Tribunal passed the interim order and directed parties to maintain status quo. Learned counsel further submits that petitioner was duly represented before the Tribunal on each and every date of hearing, however, learned [2025:RJ-JP:48189] (2 of 2) [CW-16415/2025] Advocate could not remain present on 05.07.2024 due to personal reason, resulting in dismissal of the matter in default. He further submits that the information regarding dismissal was received belatedly, therefore, the application for restoration was also filed with delay. 3. Counsel for the petitioner further submits that if the impugned orders are quashed and set aside and the reference application is restored / revived before the learned Tribunal, no prejudice would be caused to the respondents. 4. Mr. Amit Kuri learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondents opposes the prayer made by counsel for the petitioner. 5. Heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, this Court deems it appropriate to set aside the impugned orders dated 05.07.2024 and 11.08.2025. The matter is restored to its original number before the learned Tribunal. 7. Since the reference application pertains to the year 2023, it is expected from the learned Tribunal to decide the same on merits within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order without granting unwarranted adjournments to either parties. 8. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is allowed. 9. Stay application and any other pending application, if any, also stand disposed of. (SANDEEP TANEJA),J TN/24