SHRI NAMOKAR JAIN S/O LATE SHRI BHANWAR LAL JAIN v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CW/1553/2025 · 2025-01-30
Anoop Kumar Dhand
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 5268 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 5268 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:4209] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1553/2025 Shri Namokar Jain S/o Late Shri Bhanwar Lal Jain, Aged About 76 Years, R/o S-105, 106 Mahaveer Nagar, Tonk Road, Jaipur -
302018. ----Petitioner Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Agriculture Department Through Principal Secretary, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Commissioner, Agriculture Department, Pant Krishi Bhawan, Bhawani Singh Road, Jaipur.
3. Principal Secretary, Department Of Personnel, State Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Ms.Lipi Garg For Respondent(s) : Mr.Yash Joshi JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND
Order 30/01/2025
1. A limited prayer has been made by the learned counsel for the petitioner for issuing directions to the respondents to decide the representation submitted by the petitioner in the light of the
order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Pawan Meena Vs. The State of Rajasthan and Ors. while deciding S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1665/2024.
2.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that for conducting the DPC meeting pertaining to the year 2003, the petitioner approached the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur (for short, “the Tribunal”), by way of filing an appeal and the said appeal was allowed by the Tribunal vide order
[2025:RJ-JP:4209] (2 of 2) [CW-1553/2025] dated 01.07.2019, and the respondents were directed to conduct the DPC meeting within a period of three months.
3. Counsel submits that in spite of passing of considerable time, till date, the order passed by the Tribunal has not been complied with by the respondents. The petitioner has submitted several representations in the office of the respondents for compliance of the order passed by the Tribunal, but no heed has been paid. Counsel submits that under these circumstances, appropriate directions be issued to the State-Authorities to decide the representation of the petitioner by passing a speaking order.
4. The prayer made by the counsel for the petitioner appears to be genuine.
5. The instant writ petition stands disposed of with directions to the State-Authorities to decide the representation of the petitioner expeditiously as early as possible, strictly in accordance with law, preferably not beyond a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
6. All pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Aayush Sharma /26