Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Hari Singh vs State & Anr on 15 December, 2017
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14719 / 2015
Hari Singh S/o Shri Nahar Singh, by caste Rajput, aged 54 years,
R/o Mandwala, Tehsil and District Jalore
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Rajasthan through Secretary, Revenue, Secretariat,
Jaipur.
2. Tehsildar, Jalore, Jalore
----Respondents
_____________________________________________________
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Girish Joshi
For Respondent(s) : Mr. O.P. Boob
_____________________________________________________
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIRMALJIT KAUR
Order 15/12/2017 A notice was issued to the petitioner under Section 91 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 way back in the year 1972. The proceedings in pursuance to the said notice were dropped in the year 1972 itself. Thereafter, once again a notice under Section 91 of the Act of 1956 was issued to the petitioner on 17.07.1999. The same was challenged by the petitioner before the appropriate authorities and there are concurrent findings recorded by all the courts that the land occupied by the petitioner was his private property. The said findings are upheld even by the Division Bench of this Court. The Division Bench vide Order dated 28.01.2014 passed in D. B. Civil Special Appeal No. 300/2005 (State of Rajasthan Vs. Hari Singh) dismissed the appeal of the State of Rajasthan with the following observations :-
(2 of 4) [ CW-14719/2015] "In this view of the matter, its conclusion that in the attendant conspectus of facts, a fresh proceedings under Sec. 91 of the Act is not sustainable, is correct and unassailable. On a perusal of the orders passed by the learned Board of Revenue as well as the decision impugned in the present appeal, we do not find any convincing reason to take a different view." After the matter stood closed, the respondents have now once again issued a notice under Section 91 of the Act of 1956 to the petitioner for the same piece of land on 28.08.2015.
Reply has been filed. As per the reply, the land in question i.e. land comprised in Khasra No. 2019/803 which is admittedly the land of Old Khasra No. 278 was not the subject matter in the Order dated 08.02.1963 which has been upheld by the Division Bench of this Court. Whereas, it is evident from the Order dated 31.01.2001 passed by the Revenue Appellate Authority that it was this very Khasra No. 278 which was the subject matter of the proceedings under Section 91 of the Act of 1956 which stood finally closed.
Learned counsel for the respondents came up with a novel argument and stated that there is no res-judicata in issuing the notice under Section 91 of the Act of 1956 and the same can be issued as and when the property is encroached without even applying the mind that there was specific findings of all the courts that the land comprised of Khasra No. 278 was the private property of the petitioner and hence, the question of encroachment does not arise.
While defending the State, learned counsel for the (3 of 4) [ CW-14719/2015] respondents further argued that earlier orders were not on merit. It is shocking that when the controversy had been set at rest and the same has attained finality uptil the Division Bench of this very High Court, learned counsel for the State submits that the earlier orders were not on merit. Thus, it prima facie appeared to be a case of contempt.
Accordingly, contempt notice was issued by this Court vide order dated 10.11.2017. In response to the show cause notice, an additional affidavit has been filed by Mr. Kishanlal S/o Motiram presently working as Sub Tehsildar, Jasol, District Barmer. Mr. Kishanlal was the concerned Tehsildar at that point of time who issued the notice under Section 91 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 on 28.08.2015. He has explained in the additional affidavit that after issuance of notice dated 28.08.2015, the petitioner filed his reply whereby he had apprised the respondents about the earlier orders passed by different authorities including order dated 31.01.2001 passed by Revenue Appellate Authority whereby, it was held that the land in question was private property of the petitioner himself, which was upheld vide order dated 28.01.2014 passed by the Division Bench of this Hon'ble High Court in D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 300/2005, State of Rajasthan Vs. Hari Singh. Thereafter, no further action was taken in pursuance to the said notice under Section 91 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956.
In view of the above admission by the respondents the writ petition is allowed and the impugned notice dated 28.08.2015 is (4 of 4) [ CW-14719/2015] quashed. The necessary revenue entries be carried out in the revenue record in compliance of the orders passed by the various authorities within two months from today.
(NIRMALJIT KAUR), J.
arvind/34