Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Jugal Kishore Sharma Son Of Shri Ramdev ... vs State Of Rajasthan on 5 March, 2019
Author: Alok Sharma
Bench: Alok Sharma
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Writ Miscellaneous Application No.85/2019
In
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.20170/2018
1. Jugal Kishore Sharma Son Of Shri Ramdev Sharma, Aged
About 35 Years, By Caste Sharma, Resident Of Meenasar,
District Bikaner (Raj.)
2. Om Prakash Son Of Shri Phularam, Aged About 31 Years,
Resident Of Village And Post Naisar, Tehsil Sardar Shahar,
District Churu (Raj.)
3. Mohar Singh Son Of Shri Manphool Ram, Aged About 42
Years, Resident Of Village And Post Kunji, Tehsil Bhadra,
District Hanumangarh (Raj.)
4. Rajendra Kumar Son Of Shri Dilip, Resident Of Village Shri
Ramgarh, Tehsil Nohar, District Hanumangarh (Raj.)
5. Pawan Kumar Son Of Shri Banwari Lal, Resident Of Village
Sada Sirna District Hanumangarh (Raj.)
6. Ved Prakash Sharma Son Of Shri Murari Lal Sharma, Aged
About 34 Years, Resident Of 84, Friends Colony, Sirsi
Road, Panchyawala, Jaipur (Raj.)
7. Anand Kumar Saini Son Of Shri Nagarmal Saini, Aged
About 35 Years, Resident Of Village Kuwa Dharmwala,
Shakambhari Road, Tehsil Udaipurwati, District Jhunjhunu
(Raj.)
8. Sanwar Mal Saini Son Of Shri Mohan Lal Saini, Aged
About 30 Years, Resident Of Ward No. 08, Village Vot,
Tehsil Udaipurwati, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.)
9. Surendrapal Son Of Shri Bhagwan Das, Aged About 43
Years, Resident Of Ward No. 24, Tehsil Udaipurwati,
District Jhunjhunu (Raj.)
10. Bharmal Tetarwal Son Of Shri Lalaram Titarwal, Aged
About 39 Years, Resident Of Village Raiwala, District
Jalore (Raj.)
11. Balu Ram Son Of Shri Baburam Kalbi, Aged About 25
Years, Resident Of Village Dahipur, Tehsil Raniwada,
District Jalore (Raj.)
12. Om Prakash Son Of Shri Joraram Vishnoi, Aged About 35
(2 of 6) [WMAP-85/2019]
Years, Resident Of Village And Post Khara, Tehsil Sanchor,
District Jalore (Raj.)
13. Arjunram Son Of Shri Bagata Ram Vishnoi, Aged About 37
Years, Resident Of Village And Post Sarwana, Tehsil
Sanchor, District Jalore (Raj.)
14. Hootiram Son Of Shri Durgaram Choudhary, Aged About
38 Years, Resident Of Village And Post Gudha Hema,
Tehsil Chitalwana, District Jalore (Raj.)
15. Prabhuram Son Of Shri Hemram Prajapat, Aged About 26
Years, Resident Of Village And Post Keriya, Tehsil
Chitalwana, District Nagaur (Raj.)
16. Ghevar Chand Son Of Shri Juharam Suthar, Aged About
25 Years, Resident Of Village And Post Doongri, Tehsil
Ranawal, District Jalore (Raj.)
17. Mohammed Faraq Son Of Shri Mohammed Yusuf, Aged
About 34 Years, Resident Of Village And Post Chitalwana,
Tehsil Chitalwana, District Jalore (Raj.)
18. Zakir Ali Son Of Shri Sadik Ali, Aged About 39 Years,
Resident Of Village And Post Manoharthana, District
Jhalawar (Raj.)
19. Laxman Dan Son Of Shri Surajdan Charan, Aged About 30
Years, Resident Of Village And Post Rupavati Khurd, Tehsil
Rajiwada, District Jalore (Raj.)
20. Praveen Kumar Son Of Shri Bhopraj Rajpurohit, Aged
About 26 Years, Resident Of Village And Post Budtara,
Tehsil Ahor, District Jalore (Raj.)
21. Chetan Tripathi Son Of Shri Niranjan Lal Shrimali, Aged
About 38 Years, Resident Of Village And Post Dayalpura,
Tehsil Ahor, District Jalore (Raj.)
22. Kajaram Son Of Shri Harchand Ram Choudhary, Aged
About 29 Years, Resident Of Village And Post Bichawadi,
Tehsil Sanchor, District Jalore (Raj.)
23. Jay Kumar Son Of Shri Shankar Lal Purohit, Aged About
38 Years, Resident Of Village And Post Dabhal, Tehsil
Sanchor, District Jalore (Raj.)
24. Mohan Lal Son Of Shri Prabhu Ram Choudhary, Aged
About 24 Years, Resident Of Village And Post Bichawadi,
Tehsil Sanchor, District Jalore (Raj.)
25. Heer Singh Son Of Shri Mal Singh Rajput, Aged About 25
Years, Resident Of Village And Post Vadabhadvi, Tehsil
(3 of 6) [WMAP-85/2019]
Bagoda, District Jalore (Raj.)
26. Bhuvnesh Pandey Son Of Shri Hari Prasad Pandey, Aged
About 29 Years, Resident Of Village And Post Rajaldesar,
Tehsil Ratangarh, District Churu (Raj.)
27. Puja Sharma D/o Of Shri Ramkishan Sharma, Aged About
34 Years, Resident Of Village And Post Ratangarh, Tehsil
Ratangarh, District Churu (Raj.)
28. Trivendra Singh Son Of Shri Sher Singh, Aged About 27
Years, Resident Of Pali (Raj.)
29. Rakesh Son Of Shri Narpat Ram, Aged About 26 Years,
Resident Of Pali (Raj.)
30. Kalraj Singh Son Of Shri Devi Singh, Aged About 27
Years, Resident Of Village And Post Ayava, Tehsil Ahor,
District Jalore (Raj.)
31. Naresh Kumar Son Of Shri Murari Lal, Aged About 31
Years, By Caste Jat, Resident Of Village Binasar, Tehsil
And District Churu (Raj.)
32. Hem Kanwar Daughter Of Shri Mohan Singh, Wife Of Shri
Govind Singh, Aged About 27 Years, By Caste Rajput,
Resident Of Ravla Mohalla, Sirpoi, Tehsil Pirawa, District
Jhalawar (Raj.)
33. Bhupesh Kumar Sharma Son Of Shri Kapil Dev Sharma,
Aged About 27 Years, By Caste Brahmin, Resident Of
Divarala, Joshi Mohalla Nale Me, Tehsil Shri Madhopur,
District Sikar (Raj.)
34. Veer Bhadra Singh Rathore Son Of Shri Devi Singh
Rathore, Aged About 38 Years, Resident Of Village And
Post Kushalgarh, District Banswara (Raj.)
35. Shahrukh Mohammad Son Of Shri Mohamnmad Hanif,
Aged About 26 Years, Resident Of Village And Post
Chandkheri Road Khanpur, District Jhalawar (Raj.)
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary Medical And
Health Department, Government Of Rajasthan,
Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
2. Additional Chief Secretary, Medical And Health
Department, Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
3. Director, Medical And Health Services, Rajasthan, Tilak
(4 of 6) [WMAP-85/2019]
Marg, Swasthya Bhawan, Jaipur (Raj.).
4. Additional Director (Administration), Medical And Health
Services, Rajasthan, Tilak Marg, Swasthya Bhawan, Jaipur
(Raj.)
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Govind Upadhyay
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SHARMA
Order
05/03/2019
The matter comes up on an application for correction in the cause title of SBCWP No.20170/2018 in the order dated 11.12.2018 passed in SBCWP No.20027/2018 and other connected matters.
Counsel submitted that at serial no.15 of the cause title the name of the petitioner's father has been erroneously shown as 'Hemram' when in fact is 'Hanja Ram' and should be so rectified. Also the name of the District in the said petitioner's address ought to be 'Jalore' instead of 'Nagaur' as earlier also wrongly stated in the cause title. It has been submitted that with regard to the petitioner no.17--Mohammed Faraq his surname is not 'Faraq' as inadvertently typed in the cause title but is 'Pharookh Khan' and (5 of 6) [WMAP-85/2019] his father's name should be 'Mohammed Yusub Khan' instead of 'Mohammed Yusuf' as earlier stated in the cause title. These inadvertent errors in the cause title be accordingly corrected. Counsel submitted that the name of the petitioner no.30 has again been wrongly shown in the cause title as 'Kalraj Singh' when in fact it is and should correctly be 'Kalyan Singh'. Besides the name of the petitioner's Village and Post be shown as 'Alawa' and not 'Ayava' as also earlier wrongly shown in the cause title. The errors, as wrongly earlier given out in the cause title, counsel submitted, be rectified as failing the requisite corrections benefits of the order dated 11.12.2018 passed in SBCWP No.20027/2018 and other connected matters, are being denied by the respondents to the petitioners No.15, 17 and 30.
The carelessness of the counsel for the petitioner as is reflected from the admission in application for rectification indicates the casualness with which the petition was filed. And this case is not an exception. Requisite care is missing in several petitions filed. The errors of the nature in issue here and others make the work of the court's very tedious and slow. Besides it (6 of 6) [WMAP-85/2019] requires decided cases being revisited entailing expanding of precious court time. And the story of arrears in Court's continues to make head lines even without referring to the multiple factors, therefor, interalia the lack of proper assistance to the court's and the paucity of infrastructure. Though the causes above are not exhaustive and many more, rather complex, also obtain. But it is not the place to expand thereupon in this order. Be as it may, the Court has to, where is can, do justice. As it must in the instant case too.
For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed for reasons of justice albeit subject to filing of the accordingly amended cause title within six days from today.
This order shall constitute an integral part of the order dated 11.12.2018.
(ALOK SHARMA), J Himanshu/149 Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)