Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Chiranji Lal (Deceased ) Ors vs State (Board Of Revenue ) Ors on 8 November, 2016
Author: M.N. Bhandari
Bench: M.N. Bhandari
CW No.8939/2011
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
AT
JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR
ORDER
S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.8939/2011
Chiranji Lal (deceased) S/o Shri Natthi through his legal heirs :-
1. Smt. Ramvati W/o late Shri Chirnaj Lal, aged about 65 years
2. Bhogiram S/o late Shri Chiranji Lal, aged about 50 years,
3. Ratan S/o late Shri Chirnaji lal, aged about 48 years,
4. Inder S/o late Shri Chiranji Lal, aged about 45 years,
5. Kashi Ram S/o late Shri Chiranji Lal, aged about 43 years.
By caste Mali, all are residents of Namak Katra, Bharatpur.
---petitioners/non-applicants
Versus
1. The State of Rajasthan, through Tehsildar Bharatpur.
--- Applicant/
Respondent
2. The Board of Revenue Rajasthan, Ajmer.
3. The District Collector, Bharatpur.
----Respondent
s
DATE OF ORDER : 08.11.2016
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.N. BHANDARI
Mr. Sunil Kumar Singodiya, for the petitioners.
Mr. Dharmendra Pareek, Addl. GC, for the respondents.
BY THE COURT :-
CW No.8939/2011
2
By this writ petition, a challenge is made to the order dated 02.11.2010, passed by the Board of Revenue, on a reference made under Section 9 and 82 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956. The reference was for Khasra No. 1053 consists of 6 biswa, Khasra No. 1054 consists of 10 biswa and Khasra No. 1055 consists of 16 biswa in Village Chak No. 2, District Bharatpur. The land in dispute was recorded as Sawai Chak and nature of land was "Gair Mumkin Khai". The land was alloted on a patta for a period of one year in the year 1972 though the land of Gair Mumkin Khai was not available for allotment in view of Section 16 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955.
The Tehsildar made entry in favour of petitioner though he had no authority for it as the land was given on patta for a period of one year only. It is more so when the petitioner was not in possession of the land as tenant of khatedar or as sub-tenant when the Act of 1955 came in effect. The patta was given in the year 1972 thus reference has been answered against the petitioners because, based on temporary patta of one year, Khatedari right did not accrue the petitioners.
The impugned order was passed in the year 2010 and no interim order exist thus even inference goes for its implementation. The District Collector had deliberately referred the issue while making reference. Taking into consideration the facts given therein CW No.8939/2011 3 as well as the order passed by the Board of Revenue, I do not find any ground to cause interference therein. The writ petition is dismissed accordingly.
(M.N. BHANDARI), J.
Arti/Jr.P.A.