[2025:RJ-JP:49651] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18492/2025 Jagdish Prasad Sain S/o Babu Lal Sain, Aged About 59 Years, R/o Vpo Doroli, Via Kherli, Tehsil Kathumar, District Alwar, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Chief Secretary, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary Department Of Personnel And Training Government Secretariat, Jaipur. 3. The Deputy Secretary, Department Of Administrative Reforms (Group-3), Secretariat, Jaipur. 4. The Director, Sanskrit Education, Shiksha Sankul, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. R.P. Saini For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 05/12/2025 1. Instant writ petition is preferred by petitioner with following prayer: “i) Issue an appropriate writ order or direction in the nature thereof thereby the respondents be directed to give notional benefits and other service benefits to the Petitioner on the post of LDC. ii) Issue an appropriate writ order or direction in the nature thereof thereby the respondents be directed to give all service benefit/promotion/notional benefits as given in the case of Sitaram Gadhwal Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. SBCWP No. 19622/2022 decided on 25.01.2024 (Annex.2).” [2025:RJ-JP:49651] (2 of 3) [CW-18492/2025] 2. Learned counsel for petitioner while referring and relying upon judgment dated 25.01.2024 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.19622/2022 titled as Sitaram Gadhwal Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. and The Director Vs. Narendra Kumar Boolchandani and Ors. (DB Special Appeal Writ No.362/2020 dated 04.02.2022) submits that the controversy and the issue raised herein is already settled by the Division Bench of this Hon’ble Court in case of The Director Vs. Narendra Kumar Boolchandani and Ors. (supra). He further submitted that instant writ petition be disposed of in accordance with aforesaid order. 3. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for petitioner and also material placed on record, the writ petition may be disposed in light of The Director Vs. Narendra Kumar Boolchandani and Ors. (supra), decided by the Division Bench of this Court. 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 The Director Vs. Narendra Kumar Boolchandani and Ors. (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- [2025:RJ-JP:49651] (3 of 3) [CW-18492/2025] mail in his representation. If the petitioner is still aggrieved, he has a liberty to approach this Court with fresh petition. 5. Needless to say that if ratio is applicable upon facts of the case as claimed by the petitioner, then same benefits be extended. 6. With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petition with pending application, if any, stands disposed of. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J PREETI VALECHA /99