[2025:RJ-JP:50273]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19293/2025 Chunni Lal Nayak S/o Shri Pokar Ram Nayak, Aged About 37 Years, Resident Village And Post Jaitasar, Tehsil Sujangarh, District Churu (Rajasthan)

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary, Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. Secretary, Department Of School Education, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

3. District Collector, Collectorate, Karauli.

4. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Karauli.

----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sandeep Saxena Ms. Neha Swami For Respondent(s) :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN

Order

10/12/2025

1. Instant writ petition is preferred by petitioner with following prayer:

“It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that. 1. The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to kindly call the entire record of the case and quash the action of the respondent and the respondent may kindly be directed to consider the grievances of the petitioner and appointment on the post of Gram Panchayat Sahayak at Gram Panchayat Jaitasar with all consequential benefit. 2. Any order prejudicial to the interest of the petitioner, if passed during the pendency of the writ petition, the same may kindly be taken on record and be pleased to quash and set aside. 3. Any other appropriate writ, order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court may consider just and proper, in the facts and circumstances of the case, may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner. 4. Cost of writ petition may be quantified in favour of the petitioner”

2. Learned counsel for petitioner while referring and relying upon judgment dated 05.08.2024 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.18416/2017 (Surendra Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.” and 24.05.2017 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1032/2017 “Sunita Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.” submits that the controversy and the issue raised herein is already settled by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Hon’ble Court. He further submitted that instant writ petition be disposed of in accordance with aforesaid order.

3. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for petitioner and also material placed on record, the writ petition is disposed of in light of Surendra Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan &Ors. (supra) and Sunita Sharma Vs.

State of Rajasthan & Ors. (supra) passed by this Court.

4. Considered the grievance raised herein, the petitioner is given a liberty to submit a representation to the respondents-Authority within a period of 30 days raising all grounds and the respondents-Authority are directed to decide the representation in light of ratio laid down in case of (supra), but in case of deviation with a reasoned and speaking order within a period of 30 days from date of receipt of representation. After the decision, the respondents are under an obligation to communicate the order to the petitioner either by way of speed post or through E-mail, if petitioner has provided E-mail in his representation. If the petitioner is still aggrieved, he has a liberty to approach this Court with fresh petition.

5. Needless to say that if ratio is applicable upon facts of the case as claimed by the petitioner, then same benefits be extended.

6. With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petition with pending application, if any, stands disposed of.

(ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J CHETNA BEHRANI /27