[2025:RJ-JP:48459-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 1219/2025 IN S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11011/2025 Sanchit Tamra S/o Late Sh. Subir Singh Tamra, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Tamra Garden, Durgapura, Tonk Road, Jaipur. ----Appellant Versus 1. Deepak Singhal S/o Sh. Kalyan Prasad Singhal, aged about 54 Years, R/o Plot No. 49 (Wrongly mentioned as 41 in the impugned order), Patel Nagar, 22 Godown, Jaipur. 2. Jaipur Development Authority, Through its Secretary, Indira Circle, Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Sunil Samdaria Mr. Arihant Samdaria For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shiv Charan Gupta Mr. Samee Khan for JDA HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA Order 28/11/2025 1. The matter comes up on an application (I.A. No.1/2025) for vacation of stay order dated 09.10.2025 passed by this Court. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that contents as noticed by this Court on 09.10.2025 are erroneous and there is concealment on part of the appellant. He further submits that the learned Single Judge was already hearing the case and the appellant could have moved an application for correction of order and claiming status quo and there was no occasion to file an appeal. [2025:RJ-JP:48459-DB] (2 of 3) [SAW-1219/2025] 3. We have noticed the contentions and carefully gone through the order dated 09.10.2025. We find that the order passed by us is on the basis of after considering the contents of the order passed by learned Single Judge in earlier writ petition filed by the respondent-applicant namely S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4165/2025 decided on 21.04.2025. We notice that the order of 12.02.2025 was challenged, in those proceedings wherein, the respondent was restrained from raising construction of his house and was directed to maintain status quo. The stay order was not disturbed and the respondent who filed the writ petition, withdrew his writ petition with prayer to decide the appeal expeditiously within a period of one month. The prayer was allowed and the status quo order passed by the Tribunal dated 12.02.2025 continued, thus, the contents of the order passed on 09.10.2025 have not been found to be on the basis of any concealment on part of the appellant. 4. The Court further noticed that while a status quo order had been directed and was under challenge before the learned Single Judge, the Tribunal had also directed for maintaining status quo. However, by the impugned order, the learned Single Judge stayed the operation of the order dated 30.05.2025. It is resulted in disturbing the status quo. 5. We are of the opinion that till the issue is not resolved, status quo deserves to be maintained by both the parties and we therefore, do not find any reason to vacate our interim order dated 09.10.2025. The application is accordingly dismissed. 6. Having heard both the sides and considering the nature of present appeal which is only limited to the interim order dated 23.07.2025 passed by learned Single Judge, we deem it appropriate to close the present proceedings and make our order dated 09.10.2025 absolute till [2025:RJ-JP:48459-DB] (3 of 3) [SAW-1219/2025] disposal of the writ petition. Both the parties shall be free to address their arguments before learned Single Judge to examine the case on merits. However, the status quo order dated 09.10.2025 shall be continued as directed by us till disposal. 7. Parties are free to move an appropriate application before learned Single Judge for expedite hearing. 8. The appeal is accordingly disposed of. 9. All pending application(s) also stand disposed of. (MANEESH SHARMA),J (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),ACTING CJ Simple Kumawat /39