2026 Supreme(Online)(Raj) 9080
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
GANESH RAM MEENA
M/S BHUMIYA DADA TRADING COMPANY – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
CW / 5538 / 2026
##PAGE1##
[2026:RJ-JP:12918]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5538/2026
1. M/s Bhumiya Dada Trading Company, Through Its Proprietor Shri Hemant Kumar S/o Shri Budhar Singh. Registered Office At Bhooder Singh Surwari, Kosi Kalan, Mathura, (Up), Owner Of Truck Bearing Number Up-85Bt-
9502, Up-85Bt-4420, Rj-05Gb-9335, Rj-05Gb-9184.
2. Pradeep Kashyap S/o Shri Daal Chand Kashyap, R/o 19-
20, Vimla Colony, Mungaska, Alwar, Owner Of Truck Bearing Number Rj-05Gb-6435.
3. Mubarik S/o Shri Mazid Khan, R/o Shop No.10, Nh-19, Choti Masjid Nagla, Khatela Sarai, Palwal, (Haryana),
Owner Of Truck Bearing Number Hr-73B-8685.
----Petitioners Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Transport Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat,
Jaipur.
2. The Joint Secretary, Mines And Geology Department, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan,
3. Regional Transport Officer, Bharatpur.
4. Regional Transport Officer, Alwar.
5. District Transport Officer, Kotputali, District Kotputali Behror.
6. Regional Transport Officer, Sikar.
7. Regional Transport Officer, Jaipur First.
8. Regional Transport Officer, Jaipur-Ii.
9. District Transport Officer, Bhawadi, District Alwar.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Priyanka Paliwal, Ms. Morvi Sharma & Mr. Jaswant Sharma for Mr.
Rajkumar Goyal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sachin Singh Rathore, AAAG for
Mr. S.S. Naruka, AAG
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA
(Uploaded on 28/03/2026 at 10:45:51 AM)
(Downloaded on 31/03/2026 at 10:57:04 AM)
##PAGE2##[2026:RJ-JP:12918] (2 of 3) [CW-5538/2026]
Order
27/03/2026
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the controversy involved in the present writ petition has already been decided by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.17894/2025 (Tofik Ahmed & Ors. Vs. State of
Rajasthan & Ors.) decided on 20.11.2025.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents-State agrees and submits that the present writ may also be decided in the light
of the directions passed in case of Tofik Ahmed & Ors. (supra).
3. Operative parts of the order dated 20.11.2025 passed by the
Co-ordinate Bench of this Court are as follows :-
“6. Having heard the contentions made by the learned counsel for the parties, taking note of the material available on record in the petition, and the judgments cited at the Bar, this Court without going into the arena of disputed questions of facts and merits of the petition, is of a view that the impugned order, whereby the Registration Certificates of the vehicles owned / possessed by the petitioners are suspended, needs to be set aside, for the reasons that the said vehicles are the source of bread and butter of the petitioners and their families. However, the aforementioned revocation shall only be effective subject to a condition that the petitioners along with their counsel concerned shall report to / before the notice issuing authorities, on 05.12.2025, preferably in-between 11:00 am to 01:00 pm. Thereafter, due reply be filed within a period of 15
days.
7. Audience with respect to the same will be provided by competent authority on 20.12.2025. Adjudication of the same be carried out thereafter
within a period of 15 days.
8. It is made clear that during the period of consideration of grievances, the RCs of the vehicles
(Uploaded on 28/03/2026 at 10:45:51 AM)
(Downloaded on 31/03/2026 at 10:57:04 AM)
##PAGE3##[2026:RJ-JP:12918] (3 of 3) [CW-5538/2026]
owned/ possessed by the petitioners, which are suspended, shall be revoked and the status of the vehicle in furtherance to the consequential proceedings as registered and entered upon the official portal concerned, shall be updated, without
further ado.
9. It is made clear that no prejudice will be caused to either side on account of passing of the present
order.
10. In the light of the same, the present writ petition stands disposed of with the aforementioned directions being granted. Pending
applications, if any, stand disposed of.”
4. Accordingly, in view of th