Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2026 DAILYLAW 3343 (RAJ)

SHRI NARAYAN DAS TULSANI S/O LATE SHRI KISHAN CHAND TULSANI v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CW/11288/2025 · 2026-04-28

Sameer Jain

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:RJ-JP:18074] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11288/2025 Shri Narayan Das Tulsani S/o Late Shri Kishan Chand Tulsani, Aged About 67 Years, R/o- A-13, Karni Nagar, Pawanpuri, Near Shahyog Park, District Bikaner, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Chief Secretary Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat Jaipur. 2. State Public Information Officer And Additional General Manager (Law), Riico Limited, Headquarter, Udhyog Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C Scheme, Jaipur (Rajasthan) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Krishan Chander Sharma with Mr. Vaibhav Pancholiya For Respondent(s) : Mr. Santosh Kumar Jaiman HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Judgment 28/04/2026 1. At the outset, learned counsel for the respondents has taken a preliminary objection stating that three appeals were preferred before the Second Appellate Authority, wherein, the lis, facts and point of law qua the assessee was same. However, the petitioner has assailed only one of the same, and has accepted the directions and considerations as opined by the concerned authority qua the point of law. The fact of two appeals thus cannot be agitated, after the petitioner, once has accepted the adjudication made qua the same. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner is not able to refute the said facts. [2026:RJ-JP:18074] (2 of 2) [CW-11288/2025] 3. Considering the foregoing facts and circumstances and upon a perusal of the material available on record, taking note of the fact that the information as called for was already given to the petitioner, and by his own will he has chosen to assail one of the appeals; that the petitioner has not declared the said fact in the petition which prima facie depicts that the petitioner has approached the Court with unclean hands, this Court deems it fit to dismiss the present petition with the liberty to the petitioner to revive the same if the facts are otherwise. 4. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (SAMEER JAIN),J JKP/1