TUNDARAM S/O RAMCHANDRA MEENA v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CW/1432/2026 · 2026-02-10
Anuroop Singhi
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 16033 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 16033 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2026:RJ-JP:6131] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1432/2026
1. Tundaram S/o Ramchandra Meena, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Village Rehadiya Chandera, Tehsil Baswa, District Dausa.
2. Dinesh Kumar Meena S/o Late Jagdish Prasad Meena, R/o Village Rehadiya Chandera, Tehsil Baswa, District Dausa. ----Petitioners Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. District Collector, Dausa
3. Sub-Divisional Officer, Baswa District Dausa.
4. Tehsildar, Tehsil Baswa, District Dausa.
5. Regional Forest Officer, Bandikui, District Dausa ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mohar Pal Meena For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUROOP SINGHI
Order 10/02/2026
1.
Learned counsel for the petitioners after arguing for some time seeks to withdraw the present writ petition with liberty to file representation before respondent No.5 and seeks a limited direction that in the event of such representation being filed, the same be decided expeditiously. Additionally, learned counsel for the petitioners submit that since the petitioners have their residence at the plot in question, no coercive steps be taken till the decision of the representation is made.
[2026:RJ-JP:6131] (2 of 2) [CW-1432/2026]
2. Considering the limited submission so made, it is directed that in case the petitioners prefer a representation before respondent No.5 within a period of 7 days from today i.e. 10.02.2026, the respondent No.5 would decide the said representation after granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners by passing a speaking and reasoned order within a period of 15 days thereafter and till then, no coercive steps be taken against the petitioners.
3. Accordingly, with the aforesaid directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.
4. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.
5. Needless to say that this order has been passed only to decide the petitioner’s representation and in no manner is to be construed as a direction to decide the representation in a particular manner.
(ANUROOP SINGHI),J JAYANT KUMAR /117