DBSAW NO.882/08. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. O R D E R D.B. CIVIL SPECIAL APPEAL (WRIT) NO.882/2008. In S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.834/2008. Sukhvir Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan and others Date of order:- October 21, 2008. PRESENT HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI NARAYAN ROY HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Mr. R.K. Mathur for the appellant. Mr. B.L. Awasthi, Additional Government Counsel. ***** BY THE COURT :- This appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 1/2/2008 whereby, the writ petition of the appellant was dismissed as barred by the principle of res judicata. 2) Mr. R.K. Mathur, learned counsel for the appellant argued that writ petition was dismissed on the ground that earlier also petitioner filed SBCWP No.7065/2005, which was rejected by the learned Single Judge of this Court vide judgment dated 10/4/2007 and, therefore, fresh writ petition on the same subject-matter could not be filed. It was contended that writ petition aforesaid was disposed of with liberty to the appellant to make a DBSAW NO.882/08. 2 representation to the respondents and with direction to the respondents to decide such representation. Appellant thereafter filed representation and the respondents by a detailed and speaking order dated 3/12/2007 rejected the representation. It was argued that earlier, learned Single Judge thus did not render the judgment on merits of the case and it was simply disposed of with direction to the respondents to decide his representation. Now, when the representation has been decided on merits holding that there was no provision for promotion in the rules, dismissing subsequent writ petition of the petitioner could render him remediless, even though there has been no adjudication on merits. 3) Shri B.L. Awasthi, learned Additional Government Counsel has opposed the appeal. 4) Upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we have examined the matter on merits and also perused the earlier judgment dated 10/4/2007 as also the order dated 3/12/2007 dismissing representation of the appellant. We find that writ petition earlier filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the learned Single Judge observing that if petitioner has worked as Vehicle Driver, he would be free to make representation to the concerned authority, who will examine the same in accordance with law. The petitioner accordingly filed representation which has since been rejected by the DBSAW NO.882/08. 3 respondents on 3/12/2007. The rejection of his representation has certainly given rise to a fresh cause of action in favour of the petitioner entitling him to question the correctness of such order. 5) In those facts, we are not inclined to agree with the view taken by the learned Single Judge that rejection of the representation would not give rise to a fresh cause of action. In the result, the appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment dated 1/2/2008 is set-aside. The matter is remanded back to the learned Single Bench for deciding it afresh on merits. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. (NARAYAN ROY), CJ. anil