Skip to content
Try for free
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.
See full guide →

Durga Ram Choudhary Vs. State and ors

Durga Ram Choudhary vs State and ors

Type Court Judgment Court Rajasthan Jodhpur Decided Jul 07, 2014
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1154310

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
AI Brief & Ask Semantic Search Verdict Lens Devil's Bench DocMind
Start free trial See sample brief

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Rajasthan Jodhpur High Court
Decided On
Subject
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Durga Ram Choudhary

Respondent

State and ors

Excerpt

.....kothari appearance: mr.ravindra singh, for the petitioner. -- by the court: 1. the petitioners have preferred the present writ petition claiming parity of pay of the work charge employees (mistry) with the regularly appointed mistry in the respondent- mahi bajaj sagar project, banswara. since the common controvers.is involved in these writ petitions, therefore, the facts illustratively are taken of the writ petition filed by the petitioner vijaypal, being sbcwp no.3989/2014- vijaypal versus state & ors.2. the petitioner has already approached the respondent i.e.the concerned assistant engineer, the employer, by way of suitable representation vide annex.6 dated 20.01.2014. learned s.b.civil writ petition no.3989/2014 vijaypal versus state of rajasthan & ors.along-with connect 11 writ petitions. order dt: 07/07/2014 3/3 counsel for the petitioner also submitted that there are judgments in the case of similarly situated persons by this court, and upheld by the hon'ble supreme court and the petitioners are being similarly situated, are also equally entitled for the same relief. 3. since, the representation has already been filed by the petitioner before the competent authority, the petitioner cannot be permitted to avail simultaneous remedy of writ petition under article 226 of the constitution of india and the concerned authority is expected to decide the pending representations expeditiously in accordance with law. therefore, the petitioners will be well advised to pursue the same to its logical end, and, however, if any advers.order is passed by the competent authority, the petitioners will be free to avail his legal remedy in accordance with law. 4. with these observations, these writ petitions are disposed of accordingly. no costs. a copy of this order be sent to the concerned parties forthwith. (dr. vineet kothari).j. dj/- 3 c-1 to 11 c-1

Full Judgment

S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.3989/2014 Vijaypal versus State of Rajasthan & ORS.Along-with connect 11 writ petitions.

Order dt: 07/07/2014 1/3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR ORDER

(1) S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.3989/2014 Vijaypal versus State of Rajasthan & ORS.& (2) S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.3919/2014 Kalu Ram versus State of Rajasthan & ORS.& (3) S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.3933/2014 Yogendra Singh versus State of Rajasthan & ORS.& (4) S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.3988/2014 Dhulji versus State of Rajasthan & ORS.& (5) S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.3990/2014 Gomti Shankar versus State of Rajasthan & ORS.& (6) S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.3991/2014 Surya Singh versus State of Rajasthan & ORS.& (7) S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.3992/2014 Shankar Lal Rathore versus State of Rajasthan & ORS.& (8) S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.3993/2014 Rakma versus State of Rajasthan & ORS.& (9) S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.3996/2014 Kishore Kumar Sharma versus State of Rajasthan & ORS.& S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.3989/2014 Vijaypal versus State of Rajasthan & ORS.Along-with connect 11 writ petitions.

Order dt: 07/07/2014 2/3 (10) S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.3997/2014 Durga Ram Choudhary versus State of Rajasthan & ORS.& (11) S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.3998/2014 Ratan Lal versus State of Rajasthan & ORS.& (12) S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.3999/2014 Devman Ram versus State of Rajasthan & ORS.& (13) S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.3896/2014 Praveen Kumar Jain versus State of Rajasthan & ORS.Date of Order ::: 07th July, 2014 PRESENT HON'BLE Dr.

JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI Appearance: Mr.Ravindra Singh, for the petitioner.

-- BY THE COURT: 1.

The petitioners have preferred the present writ petition claiming parity of pay of the Work Charge Employees (Mistry) with the regularly appointed Mistry in the respondent- Mahi Bajaj Sagar Project, Banswara.

Since the common controveRs.is involved in these writ petitions, therefore, the facts illustratively are taken of the writ petition filed by the petitioner Vijaypal, being SBCWP No.3989/2014- Vijaypal versus State & ORS.2.

The petitioner has already approached the respondent i.e.the concerned Assistant Engineer, the employer, by way of suitable representation vide Annex.6 dated 20.01.2014.

Learned S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.3989/2014 Vijaypal versus State of Rajasthan & ORS.Along-with connect 11 writ petitions.

Order dt: 07/07/2014 3/3 counsel for the petitioner also submitted that there are judgments in the case of similarly situated persons by this Court, and upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the petitioners are being similarly situated, are also equally entitled for the same relief.

3.

Since, the representation has already been filed by the petitioner before the competent authority, the petitioner cannot be permitted to avail simultaneous remedy of writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and the concerned authority is expected to decide the pending representations expeditiously in accordance with law.

Therefore, the petitioners will be well advised to pursue the same to its logical end, and, however, if any adveRs.order is passed by the competent authority, the petitioners will be free to avail his legal remedy in accordance with law.

4.

With these observations, these writ petitions are disposed of accordingly.

No costs.

A copy of this order be sent to the concerned parties forthwith.

(Dr.

VINEET KOTHARI).J.

DJ/- 3 C-1 to 11 C-1

Continue Your Research

Same Court & Year Rajasthan Jodhpur · 2014 Same Parties Durga Ram Choudhary vs State and ors Same Subject Land Acquisition
Land Acquisition

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial
1M+ judgments indexed

Brief any judgment in 18 sections.

Search Supreme Court, High Courts, and tribunals - then open an AI Brief on any result. Core search is free; full AI desk free for 7 days.

Start 7-day free trial - no card Talk to Sales