ARUN BHANSALI, J. - (1.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the issue raised in the present writ petition is similar to the issue raised in Ramesh Chand Saini and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan and Ors.: D.B.
(2.) Civil Writ Petition No.4253/2019, decided on 12.3.2019 at Jaipur Bench. Another similar order in Rahul Sagarwanshi and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan and Ors.: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6239/2020, decided on 30.07.2020, has been placed on record as Annex.3.
(3.) In view of the submissions made, the present writ petition is also disposed of with similar directions as given in the case of Rahul Sagarwanshi (supra), which reads as under:- 'Counsel further submits that the petitioners would be satisfied, if the State-respondents are directed to consider and decide the representation of the petitioners, in the backdrop of the adjudication in the case of Ramesh Chand Saini and Ors. (supra), within a time frame, which they are ready and willing to address within two weeks hereinafter. In view of the limited prayer addressed; the instant writ proceedings are closed with a direction to the petitioners to address a comprehensive representation enclosing a copy of the order in the case of Ramesh Chand Saini and ors. (supra). In case, a representation is so addressed within the aforesaid period, the State-respondents are directed to consider and decide the same by a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the representation along with a certified copy of this order. With the observations and directions, as indicated above, the writ petition stands disposed of. Stay petition also stands disposed of.' ;