[2025:RJ-JP:14350] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3867/2025 Abdul Khaleel Kureshi S/o Alimuddin Kureshi, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Ward No 17 Near Sub Jail Chhawani Neem Ka Thana, (Rajasthan). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Commissioner Cum Joint Secretary Information Technology And Communication Department, Jaipur (Raj.) ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dharmendra Pareek JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 28/03/2025 1. Aggrieved by the order dated 02.12.2024 passed by the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as “Tribunal”) by which the appeal preferred by the petitioner has been disposed of with directions to the petitioner to submit a representation before the said authorities for redressal of his grievances and the authority concerned were directed to decide the same by passing a speaking order within a period of two months. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that representation submitted by the petitioner has been rejected by the authorities on 14.02.2025 without taking into account the averments mentioned in the representation and the detailed observations made by the Tribunal. Hence, under these circumstances, the order passed by the respondent is not tenable in the eye of law and is liable to be quashed and set-aside. 3. Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on the record. [2025:RJ-JP:14350] (2 of 2) [CW-3867/2025] 4. Perusal of the record indicates that basically the petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 14.02.2025 passed by the respondent by which representation submitted by the petitioner pursuant to the order dated 02.12.2024 passed by the Tribunal has been rejected. 5. In the considered opinion of this Court, now a fresh cause of action has arisen with the petitioner to approach the Tribunal again by way of filing a separate appeal before it against the impugned order dated 14.02.2025 passed by the respondent- authority. 6. Since the petitioner has got alternative efficacious remedy of filing an appeal before the Tribunal, he cannot be allowed to by- pass the jurisdiction of the Tribunal. 7. It is settled proposition of law that whenever alternative efficacious statutory remedy is available to a person, he cannot be allowed to by-pass the jurisdiction of such Authority. 8. In view of the above, the instant writ petition stands disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the Tribunal by way of filing an appeal. 9. In case, any appeal is submitted by the petitioner before the Tribunal within a period of one month from today, the Tribunal is expected to hear and decide the same on its merits after affording due opportunity of hearing to all the respective parties, expeditiously as early as possible. 10. Stay application and all applications (pending, if any) also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Karan/12