Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Chaturbhuj Gattani And Ors vs Municipal Council,Rajsamand And Anr. ... on 6 October, 2023
Author: Nupur Bhati
Bench: Nupur Bhati
[2023:RJ-JD:33332]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7654/2018
1. Chaturbhuj Gattani S/o Shri Sriniwas Ji, Resident Of
Ramanuj Sadan, Subhash Nagar, Kankroli, District-
Rajsamand Raj..
2. Shri Mohan Lal S/o Shri Shanti Lal Chhaparwal, Resident
Of Nai Road, Bus Stand, Nathdwara, District Rajsamand
Raj..
3. Bhanwar Lal S/o Shri Varda Mali, Resident Of Rajnagar,
District Rajsamand Raj..
----Petitioners
Versus
1. Municipal Council, Rajsamand Through Commissioner,
Municipal Council Rajsamand Raj..
2. Director, Local Self Department, Government Of
Rajasthan, Jaipur Raj.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Paramveer Singh
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Yashwant Mehta
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI
Order 06/10/2023
1. This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India with the following prayers:
"It is therefore most humbly prayed on behalf of the petitioners that the writ petition may kindly be allowed and:-
A. By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the impugned notice dated 29.12.2016 (Annex.-6) issued by the Commissioner, Municipal Council, Rajsamand may kindly be quashed and set aside.(Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 07:04:19 AM)
[2023:RJ-JD:33332] (2 of 4) [CW-7654/2018] B. By an appropriate writ, order or direction the impugned order dated 25.10.2017 Annex.-9 passed by the Director, Local Self Department may kindly be quashed and set aside. C. Further by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may be directed to issue the remaining pattas with respect to conversion of land of the petitioner. D. Pending the petition, if any order is passed or any action is taken against the petitioners prejudicial to their interest, the same may kindly be quashed and set aside. E. Any other appropriate order or direction which this Hon'ble Court considers just and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case, may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioners.
F. Cost of the writ petition may kindly be awarded to the petitioners.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioners preferred an application for conversion of the agriculture land situated in Araji No.584, 585, 586, 598 and 631 in Rajnagar, Tehsil and District Rajsamand under Section 90(A) of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 (for short 'the Act of 1956) before the respondents. The respondents allowed the application of the petitioners vide order dated 23.02.2016 and the conversion of the land was permitted and after assessing the amount, the petitioners were directed to pay sum of Rs.38,66,680/-. The petitioners deposited the said amount on 21.04.2016 vide various e-challans. After deposition of the said amount, the respondents vide order dated 09.03.2016 (Annex-5), issued pattas with respect to the converted land in favour of the petitioners.
3. The petitioners were served upon the notice dated 29.12.2016 by which the respondents raised a demand of Rs.52,18,330/- against the petitioners, on the basis that after (Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 07:04:19 AM) [2023:RJ-JD:33332] (3 of 4) [CW-7654/2018] calculation, it has been found that an outstanding amount of Rs.52,18,330/- was due on the part of petitioners under the Mukhya Mantri Jan Awas Yojna, 2015 (Annex.-6). The petitioners preferred revision petition on 24.08.2017, however, the same was dismissed vide order dated 25.10.2017 (Annex.-9). The petitioners being aggrieved with the same preferred this writ petition.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the impugned notice dated 29.12.2016 (Annex.-6) is per se illegal as the outstanding amount of Rs.52,18,330/- has been directed to be deposited, while stating that since the petitioners had applied in Mukhya Mantri Jan Awas Yojna, 2015, thus the petitioners are liable to pay the said amount, whereas the petitioners in the application placed as Annex.-2 have applied for conversion of the land in dispute under Section 90-A of the Act of 1956. Learned counsel for the petitioners also submits that under the said scheme, it is nowhere mentioned that whosoever had applied for conversion of the land would be considered under the provisions of the scheme even if he does not apply in the said scheme.
5. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioners had though deposited a sum of Rs.38,66,680/-, however, as the petitioners had duly applied under the said scheme and thus notice dated 29.12.2016 (Annex.-6) has rightly been issued in favour of the petitioners.
6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
7. It is apparent upon perusal of the application (Annex.-2) preferred by the petitioners that the petitioners had applied for (Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 07:04:19 AM) [2023:RJ-JD:33332] (4 of 4) [CW-7654/2018] conversion of the land in dispute under Section 90-A of the Act of 1956 and the petitioners have not submitted the application for the conversion of land under the Mukhya Mantri Jan Awas Yojna, 2015, thus, the respondent have not considered this aspect of the matter and without application of mind have passed the impugned order.
8. It is admitted position that the petitioners have deposited the conversion fee, whatsoever was chargeable to the respondents upon conversion of the land in dispute under Section 90-A of the Act of 1956 and thus, the respondents have wrongly raised demand of sum of Rs. 50,75,040/- against the petitioners as well as interest amount which has been calculated based on the said amount while considering the application (Annexure-2) of the petitioner falling under Mukhya Mantri Jan Awas Yojna, 2015.
9. Thus, the order dated 25.10.2017 (Annex.-9) passed by Rajasthan Local Self Department and the impugned notice dated 29.12.2016 (Annex.-6) to the extent of recovery of the amount of Rs. 50,75,040/- as well as interest stated in the same upon the amount of Rs. 50,75,040/-, treating the petitioner's conversion of land under the Mukhya Mantri Jan Awas Yojna, 2015 are hereby quashed and set aside.
11. The writ petition is allowed to the extent of aforesaid observations. Stay petition as well as all pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
(DR.NUPUR BHATI),J surabhii/173- (Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 07:04:19 AM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)