Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Smt Rupi And Ors vs State Of Raj And Ors on 16 November, 2011
Author: Ajay Rastogi
Bench: Ajay Rastogi
In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Jaipur Bench **
1-Civil Writ Petition No.2055/2010 Smt. Rupi & Ors Versus State & Ors ** 2-Civil Writ Petition No.10737/2010 Shankar Singh Versus State & Ors Date of Order ::: 16/11/2011 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi Mr. Devendra Raghava, for petitioner (CWP-2055/2010) Mr. Dileep Sharma for Mr. Peeyush Nag, for petitioner (CW-10737/10) Mr. S.Zakawat Ali, Addl.Govt. Counsel for respondents-State Mr. AS Rathore, for Mr. Ajeet Bhandari, for respondent-3 & 5(2055/10) Mr. Amit Kuri, for respondent- 3 & 6 (CWP-10737/2010) Both the petitions have been filed by petitioners assailing their dispossession from the land on which some Pucca construction has been raised - regulaisation whereof has also been prayed on the basis of their long possession, and for issuance of the Patta to them.
It has been alleged by petitioner that they made Pucca construction over Khasra No.109 & 121 in village Palara (Ajmer) and are in possession for sufficient long time but they are being dispossessed by respondents without due process of law. To establish their possession, documents have been produced viz. Electricity bills, certificates issued by Gram Panchayat Pallara (Ajmer).
Taking note whereof, while issuing notices, interim order was passed by the Court on 26/02/2010 to maintain status quo. After notices were served, reply has been filed by respondents, stating that there was no allotment ever made in favour of petitioner; as such no right can be claimed; however, the land of Khasra No.109 & 121 being Siwai Chak was allotted by State Government to respondents-RIICO after being set apart by the Collector Ajmer U/s 92 of Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 for industrial purpose on certain terms & conditions. A Schedule has also been attached disclosing the land having been allotted to respondents (RIICO) by State Government vide order dt.26/04/2006 (Ann.R3/1).
What has been contended by petitioners is about their possession but how they came in possession over the land in dispute, nothing is on record and in absence of holding any lawful possession, right could not be claimed regarding regularization and once land was Siwai Chak and allotted by State Government to respondents (RIICO) vide order dt.26/04/2006 (Ann.R3/1), certainly they are at liberty to take action for dispossession of such of incumbents/inhabitants who are in possession of the land, over which respondents (RIICO) are holding valid title on being transferred by State Government vide order dt.26/04/2006 (Ann.R.3/1); but if any person is in possession of the land, certainly he has to be dispossessed after due process in accordance with law.
In the instant case, no action has taken by respondents against petitioners regarding their dispossession, at this stage the petition is premature and if any action is taken regarding dispossession, they are always at liberty to avail of remedy under the law.
Consequently, both the writ petition are devoid of merit and accordingly dismissed. Interim orders passed by this Court stand vacated. No order as to costs.
(Ajay Rastogi), J.
K.Khatri/p3/ 2055CW2010Nov16(2)Ds.do