Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2026 DAILYLAW 5515 (RAJ)

SURENDRA KUMAR GURJAR S/O SHRI KAJOR MAL GURJAR v. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CW/3231/2026 · 2026-02-19

Ganesh Ram Meena

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:RJ-JP:7929] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3231/2026 Surendra Kumar Gurjar S/o Shri Kajor Mal Gurjar, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Village Peelwa, Post Chandwaji, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Urban Development And Housing Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur, (Raj.) 2. The Commissioner, Jaipur Development Authority, Jln Marg, Indra Circle, Jaipur (Raj.) 3. The Secretary, Jaipur Development Authority, Jln Marg, Indra Circle, Jaipur (Raj.) 4. Dy. Commissioner, Zone-7, Jaipur Development Authority, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dharam Veer Tholia For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 19/02/2026 Learned Council for the petitioner summits that vide Annexure-1, it is clear that the petitioner has been allotted a flat No. E /XII /4 (EWS) admeasuring 322.59 sq.ft. to the petitioner after lucky draw in lottery. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner has deposited the required amount and has submitted representation to the respondent-authorities and notice for demand of justice but the respondents have failed to handover the possession of the flat allotted to him. [2026:RJ-JP:7929] (2 of 2) [CW-3231/2026] Learned counsel for the petitioner after arguing at some length submits that the petitioner be allowed to make a fresh representation to the respondent-authorities in addition to earlier representation and legal notice, the respondent be directed to consider and decide the representation by a reasoned and speaking order. In view of the limited prayer made by the counsel for the petitioner in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court grants liberty to the petitioner to make a fresh representation to the respondent-authorities within a period of ten days. In case the respondent-authorities received any representation from the petitioner, same shall be considered and decided by them by reasoned and speaking order within a period of 30 days from the date of receiving the representation. It goes to saying that in case the respondent-authorities finds the claim of the petitioner to be bonafide, necessary action be taken by them. Accordingly, writ petition stands disposed of. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J SHRUTI SHARMA /61