Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Saraswati Dev vs Nagar Palika, Sadulshahar, ... on 16 January, 2020
Author: Arun Bhansali
Bench: Arun Bhansali
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16645/2019
Saraswati Dev W/o Sh. Jagdish Prashad, Aged About 56 Years,
R/o Ward No. 9, Tehsil Sadulshahar, District Ganganagar.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Nagar Palika, Sadulshahar, Sriganganagar, Through Its
Chairman, Nagar Palika, Sadulshahar.
2. Executive Engineer, Nagar Palika, Sadulshahar, District Sri
Ganganagar.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Dr. Sachin Acharya.
For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI
Order 16/01/2020 This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved against the notice dated 19.7.2019 (Annex.3), issued by the respondent - Municipal Board.
Learned counsel for the petitioner made submissions that in response to the notice, the petitioner has already filed his reply inter alia disputing the recovery sought to be made by the respondent - Municipal Board, however, the said aspect has not been decided by the respondent - Municipal Board despite passage of over 5 months.
Further submissions have been made that in a similar nature writ petition, a Coordinate Bench of this Court in Mukhtyar Singh v. Nagar Palika Sadulsahar & Anr.: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.16700/2019, decided on 14.12.2019 has required the (Downloaded on 16/01/2020 at 11:21:00 PM) (2 of 2) [CW-16645/2019] respondents to decide the response / representation filed by the petitioner and, therefore, the same order may be passed in the present writ petition also.
In the circumstances of the case, wherein, the petitioner has already responded to the notice, it is required of the respondent - Municipal Board to decide the aspect pertaining to recovery, qua which, notice was issued to the petitioner.
In view thereof, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to decide the pending matter pertaining to the recovery sought to be made against the petitioner vide Annex.3. Further, without deciding the response / representation given by the petitioner, no recovery shall be made from the petitioner.
The petitioner would be free to file a fresh / detailed representation, if so advised.
(ARUN BHANSALI),J 29-Sumit/-
(Downloaded on 16/01/2020 at 11:21:00 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)