Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
Dinesh Mehta, J
Mamta – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
ORDER :
DINESH MEHTA, J.
I.A. (01/2025) :-
1. For the reasons stated, the application seeking early hearing of the matter, is allowed.
2. The matter is taken up for consideration today itself.
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11666/2018 :-
1. Learned counsel for the respondents, at the outset submitted that on 08.08.2018, an interim order came to be passed by this Court in light of the interim order passed in SB Civil Writ Petition No.11273/2012 titled as “Smt. Kalpana & Ors. vs. Union of India &Ors.” and the said writ petition has already been disposed of by Coordinate Bench of this Court, three years ago i.e. on19.03.2015.
2. He submitted that the case of Smt. Kalpana (supra) has been disposed of, in light of order dated 26.02.2014 passed by Jaipur Bench of this Court in the case of Mohan Lal Damor and Anr. vs. Union of India & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2319/2014), with a direction to respondents to consider petitioners’ representation and prayed that the present writ petition be also disposed of in same terms.
3. In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider petitioners’ representation in light of the judgment rendered
The court emphasized the necessity for the respondents to consider the petitioners' representation in light of previous judicial decisions, ensuring timely redressal without dictating the outcome.
The court established that while it can direct the consideration of representations, it does not dictate the outcome of such considerations.
The court emphasized the need for expeditious redressal of the petitioners' grievance.
The court directed the competent authority to consider the petitioners' representation in accordance with law and prior judgment, emphasizing expeditious but unbiased consideration.
Emphasis on expeditious disposal of cases in prolonged litigation and adherence to previous court directions.
Government authorities must decide representations promptly, ensuring procedural obligations are met without adjudicating the merits of the controversy.
Administrative authorities are required to address pending representations promptly, ensuring compliance with relevant government directives.
The court has the authority to direct a respondent to decide a representation within a specified timeframe without commenting on the merit of the controversy.
The court mandated the expeditious disposal of prolonged litigation, emphasizing compliance with prior directives on urgency and the procedural handling regarding deceased respondents.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
