Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2026 DAILYLAW 9031 (RAJ)

DHARMI CHAND v. RAJ COOP DAIRY FEDERATION LTD

CW/2718/2002 · 2026-06-30

Inderjeet Singh

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:RJ-JP:23825] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2718/2002 URN: CW / 4142U / 2002 Dharmi Chand Jain S/o Shri Sajjan Singh Jain, aged 45 years, R/o V.P. Jharwasa, via Badanwara, Distt. Ajmer. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Rajasthan Cooperative Diary Federation Ltd., Saras Sankul, Jawaharlal Nehru Marg, Jaipur through its Chairman Managing Director. 2. Japiur Zila Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sangh, near Gandhi Nagar, Railway Station, Jaipur through its Managing Director ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : None present For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rupin Kala HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH Order 30/06/2026 This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:- “i) to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside the seniority list dated 5.1.2002(Annx.3) ii) to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to issue a fresh seniority list of Dairy supervisors incorporating the name of petitioner in it and assigning him seniority at proper place as per his initial date of appointment, with all consequential benefits iii) any other appropriate writ, order or direction as may be deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be passed in favour of petitioner; and iv) to allow the cost of this writ petition in favour of the petitioner.” [2026:RJ-JP:23825] (2 of 2) [CW-2718/2002] During pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner has already been retired from service about eight years back. Counsel for the petitioner submits that all the retiral benefits have already been paid to the petitioner by the respondents. I have perused the record and also considered the submissions made by counsel for the respondent. In my considered view, by efflux of time, the present writ petition has become infructuous. Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of as having become infructuous. (INDERJEET SINGH),J JYOTI/5