[2025:RJ-JP:11775] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2346/2025 Shishram Verma Son of Shri Ramchandra Verma, Aged About 39 Years, Resident of Village Post Bhadwadi, District Sikar (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus 1. State of Rajasthan, Through Additional Chief Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. State Mission Director, Rajasthan Grameen Aajeevika Vikas Parishad, 3Rd Floor-B-Block, Udyog Bhawan, C- Scheme, Jaipur. 3. Project Director (Administration), Rajasthan Grameen Aajeevika Vikas Parishad, 3Rd Floor-B-Block, Udyog Bhawan, C-Scheme, Jaipur. 4. District Project Manager, Rajasthan Grameen Aajeevika Vikas Parishad, District Project Management Unit, Jodhpur Rto Office, B.J.S. Colony, Pawta- C Road, Jodhpur (Rajasthan). 5. Rajasthan Grameen Aajeevika Vikas Parishad (Rajeevika), IIIrd Floor, RFC Block, Udyog Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C- Scheme, Jaipur- 302005 Through State Project Manager (Hr). ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. K.C. Surela For Respondent(s) : JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 17/03/2025 1. By way of filing this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking direction against the respondents to permit him to join the duty on the post of Project Associate-MIS. [2025:RJ-JP:11775] (2 of 3) [CW-2346/2025] 2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed as Project Associate-MIS on contract basis for a period of five years or upto the expiry of the period of scheme/project, whichever is earlier vide order dated 19.10.2022. Counsel submits that the petitioner remained on leave on account of illness of his father for a certain period and the petitioner intimated about the aforesaid fact to the respondents but the absence period of the petitioner was treated as serious and consequently, District Project Manager returned the services of the petitioner to State Project Manager vide order dated 26.03.2024. Counsel submits that thereafter, the petitioner joined the office of the Project Director (Administration), however, again the service of the petitioner was remitted to the District Project Manager vide order dated 12.04.2024 but the District Project Manager is not allowing the petitioner to rejoin. Counsel submits that the petitioner has submitted several representations before the respondents for allowing him to rejoin. Counsel submits that neither the petitioner has been allowed nor his representation has been decided by the respondents for the reasons best known to them, hence under these circumstances, interference of this Court is warranted. 3. Considering the arguments raised by counsel for the petitioner and looking to the fact that before approaching this Court, the petitioner had submitted several representations before the respondents for redressal of his grievance but inspite of passing of considerable time, till date, those representations have not been decided by the respondents by way of reasoned and speaking order. [2025:RJ-JP:11775] (3 of 3) [CW-2346/2025] 4. It is settled proposition of law as laid down by this Court in the case of Pawan Meena Versus State of Rajasthan in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1665/2024 decided on 02.02.2024, whenever any representation is submitted by any aggrieved persons before any department, such department is duty bond to consider and decide the same by passing a reasoned and speaking order. 5. The present writ petition stands disposed of, with direction to the respondents to decide the representation of the petitioner by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the receipt of the certified copy of this order. 6. Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Ashu/11