1 I N THE HI GH COURT OF JUDI CATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAI PUR BENCH, JAI PUR S.B. Civil W r it Pet it ion No. 2 6 1 1 / 2 0 0 3 (Shyam Singh Rajpurohit Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Anr.) AND S.B. Civil W r it Pet it ion No. 9 4 3 8 / 2 0 0 2 (Shyam Singh Rajpurohit Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Anr.) AND S.B. Civil W r it Pet it ion No. 2 8 4 2 / 2 0 0 3 (Shyam Singh Rajpurohit Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Anr.) AND S.B. Civil W r it Pet it ion No. 2 8 5 6 / 2 0 0 3 (Shyam Singh Rajpurohit Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Anr.) AND S.B. Civil W r it Pet it ion No. 2 8 5 7 / 2 0 0 3 (Shyam Singh Rajpurohit Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Anr.) AND S.B. Civil W r it Pet it ion No. 2 8 5 8 / 2 0 0 3 (Shyam Singh Rajpurohit Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Anr.) AND S.B. Civil W r it Pet it ion No. 2 8 5 9 / 2 0 0 3 (Shyam Singh Rajpurohit Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Anr.) AND S.B. Civil W r it Pet it ion No. 2 8 6 0 / 2 0 0 3 (Shyam Singh Rajpurohit Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Anr.) AND S.B. Civil W r it Pet it ion No. 2 8 6 1 / 2 0 0 3 (Shyam Singh Rajpurohit Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Anr.) AND S.B. Civil W r it Pet it ion No. 2 8 6 2 / 2 0 0 3 (Shyam Singh Rajpurohit Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Anr.) 2 Dat e of Or der : 2 0 t h Decem ber , 2 01 0 HON'BLE MR. JUSTI CE M.N. BHANDARI Mr. Shyam Singh Rajpurohit, petitioner is present in person. By t h e Cou r t : On request of petitioner, matters have been heard finally. The petitioner filed writ petitions to challeng prosecution sanction against him pursuant to FIR lodged by Anti Corruption Bureau. In all, 15 similar cases were detected against the petitioner while he was working as Land Acquisition Officer, Beesalpur Project. In five cases, prosecution sanction was not granted, whereas, in other ten cases, prosecution sanction was granted though all the 15 cases are of similar nature. Petitioner was only a Land Acquisition Officer, thus any illegality or irregularity in the revenue record cannot be attributed to him, rather if anything was done therein, it is by Revenue Authorities. It is informed that the Tehsildar concerned was even dismissed from service on that count. Petitioner present in person submits that his matter has already been taken up by the Government for withdrawal of prosecution sanction. The matter travelled not only to the office of Chief Secretary but even to the Chief Minister, however, final decision has not yet been taken. Petitioner is suffering on that 3 count as he is not getting promotions though become due. This is specially when prosecution sanction granted was ordered to be withdrawn in the cases of other in few cases of different department that too even after filing of charge sheet. The name of few officers are given below: 1. ᮰ी रमाकांत शमार्, औषिध िनयंᮢक 2. ᮰ी िकशोर िसह राठौड़, सहकािरता िवभाग 3. ᮰ी अरुण कुमार गु᳙ा, सावर्जािनक िनमार्ण िवभाग 4. ᮰ी िवष्णु चंद शमार्, वन िवभाग 5. ᮰ी कल्याण िसह ढाबी, िवकास अिधकारी It is urged that matter may be disposed of with a direction to the respondents to take a final decision in regard to withdrawal of prosecution sanction against petitioner after considering that decision was taken against five officers named above. This is moreso when in petitioner's case, charge sheet has not yet been filed, whereas, in case of five officers named above, prosecution sanction was withdrawn after filing of charge sheet. I have considered the submissions made by petitioner. Copy of note sheet has been produced for perusal, wherein petitioner's matter has been taken up for withdrawal of prosecution sanction. 4 In the light of aforesaid, these writ petitions are disposed of with the direction to respondents to take a final decision in petitioner's matter in regard to withdrawal of prosecution sanction. It is expected from the respondents that they will take a proper view after considering the fact that if such withdrawal is permitted in other cases, petitioner can be treated differently or with discrimination. If not, then why the petitioner's case has not been concluded by now. In any case, the respondents are expected to take final decision within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. It is expected that they will take just and proper view keeping in mind over all circumstances of the case and such decision would be without discrimination. Till the directions aforesaid are complied with, interim order passed will remain in effect. In case, any adverse order is passed against petitioner, he would be at liberty to file a fresh writ petition. ( M.N. BHANDARI ) ,J. I t em No.7 4 t o 8 3 Pr eet y , Jr .P.A.