Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Roshan Lal vs State Of Rajasthan on 22 April, 2022
Author: Dinesh Mehta
Bench: Dinesh Mehta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3701/2022 Roshan Lal S/o Shravan Kumar Khariwal, Aged About 61 Years, Bada Mahua, Tehsil And District Bhilwara.
----Petitioner Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Government Of Rajasthan, Panchayati Raj Department, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Additional District Collector, Bhilwara.
3. The Gram Panchayat Bada Mahua, Through Its Sarpanch.
4. Babulal S/o Rameshwar Lal Sahrma, Bada Mahua, Tehsil And District Bhilwara.
5. Dinesh Kumar S/o Shri Rameshwar Lal Sharma, Bada Mahua, Tehsil And District Bhilwara.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Prashant Tatia for
Mr. Sajjan Singh Rajpurohit
For Respondent(s) : ---
JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
Order
22/04/2022
1. By way of present petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 10.01.2022, passed by the learned Additional District Collector, Bhilwara (hereinafter referred to as 'the Revisional Court') in a revision petition that was filed by respondent No. 4 and 5 challenging petitioner's 'patta'.
2. Precisely narrated the facts relevant are that when the respondent No. 4 and 5 started raising construction upon a land for which a Patta was issued to them, the petitioner instituted a (Downloaded on 25/04/2022 at 09:05:05 PM) (2 of 4) [CW-3701/2022] suit for injunction claiming ownership and possession over said land on the basis of 'Bapi patta' (perpetual lease) dated 25.04.1984 issued by Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Bada Mahua, District Bhilwara.
3. Respondent No.3 & 4 challenged petitioner's 'Patta' dated 25.04.1984 by way of filing a revision under Section 97 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994.
4. Learned Revisional Court upon considering the facts and pleadings of the parties allowed the revision and set aside petitioner's 'patta' dated 25.04.1984, inter alia observing that the same was illegally issued and huge chunk of land admeasuring 30,000 sq. ft. has been conveyed to the petitioner.
5. It has also been held by the Revisional Court that as per Rule 157(i) of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996, no patta can be issued for a land measuring more than 300 sq. yard. (2700 sq. ft.) and that under the provisions of Panchayati Raj Act, a patta can be issued only in relation to old possession and that too for residential purpose, whereas contentious 'patta' has been issued for of establishment of factory. It has also been found as a fact that no factory has been established by the petitioner.
6. While allowing the revision petition, the learned Revisional Authority has also referred to communication dated 30.04.2018 sent by the Panchayat Samiti, Gram Panchayat Bada Mahua intimating that record for grant of such patta is not available in the Panchayat.
7. Calling in question, the order aforesaid learned counsel submitted that during the course of hearing of the revision petition, the petitioner had requested the Additional District Collector to defer hearing as the matter between the parties was (Downloaded on 25/04/2022 at 09:05:05 PM) (3 of 4) [CW-3701/2022] subjudice in the competent Civil Court and there was an order of maintaining status quo.
8. He argued that in view of the order of maintaining the status quo the Revisional Court ought to have deferred the hearing and thus, it could not have set aside the patta. It was also argued that the Revisional Court has erred in relying upon the provisions of Rules of 1996, because petitioner's patta was granted on 25.04.1984. He added that according to then prevailing Rules of 1961, a Patta could be granted for any size and that the petitioner was granted patta in terms of Rule 266 of the Rules of 1961.
9. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the materials available on record.
10. A simple look at the impugned patta, shows that it has been issued for a huge chunk of land admeasuring 30000 sq. ft. (300'x100'). That apart, the patta in question bears the signature of Sarpanch only and the signatures of the Secretary or BDO are absent.
11. True it is, that the Revisional Authority has erred in relying upon the provisions of Rule 157 of the Rules of 1961, as the petitioner's patta was granted in the year 1984. But the same would hardly matter because even under the Rules of 1961, no patta could have been granted by the Panchayat for industrial use. The Panchayat can grant patta only for residential purpose that too within the bounds of Rule 266 of the Rules of 1961.
12. According to Rule 266, if a person is in possession of a Abadi land for more then 20 years, the land can be granted to him on payment of 1/6th of the market price.
(Downloaded on 25/04/2022 at 09:05:05 PM)
(4 of 4) [CW-3701/2022]
13. The petitioner has not placed on record the proceedings undertaken by the concerned Gram Panchayat at the time of issuing the patta to him.
14. A look at the patta shows that a sum of Rs. 1001/- has been paid by the petitioner against the patta in question but calculation as to how this amount has been determined has not been placed.
15. The patta in question, which has been issued for huge chunk of land admeasuring 30000 sq. ft., has been issued only for a consideration of Rs.1001/-. That apart, it does not bear signatures of the Secretary; it neither bears number nor does it contain the date of issuance.
16. In absence of any provision for grant of 'Bapi Patta' for industrial use and that too when the land in question has remained unutilised, there arise serious doubts about the genuineness of the patta. Neither the petitioner has produced any supporting material nor is the record available in the Panchayat. Such being the position, in the opinion of this Court, the revisional authority has committed no error of law or of jurisdiction by setting the patta aside.
17. The petition, therefore fails, and is dismissed accordingly.
18. Stay petition also stands dismissed.
(DINESH MEHTA),J 105-jayesh/-
(Downloaded on 25/04/2022 at 09:05:05 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)