Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Gordhan Lal vs Board Of Revenue Of Raj. Ajmer And Ors on 9 March, 2022
Author: Vinit Kumar Mathur
Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
AT JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4051/2017
Gordhan Lal Son of Late Shri Jagannath, By Caste Rajpurohit,
Resident Of Ward No. 15, Jhanwaron Ka Chowk, Near Sadafate,
Bikaner.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Board Of Revenue For Rajasthan, Ajmer.
2. The Sub Divisional Officer, Nokha, District Bikaner.
3. Dungardas, Son Of Shri Bhanwar Lal, By Caste
Rajpurohit, Resident Of Near Dudi Petrol Pump, Bangla
Nagar, Bikaner.
4. Satyanarain, Son Of Shri Bhanwar Lal, By Caste
Rajpurohit, Resident Of Near Dudi Petrol Pump, Bangla
Nagar, Bikaner.
5. Champa Devi, Daughter Of Shri Bhanwar Lal, Wife Of Shri
Shyam Singh, By Caste Rajpurohit, Resident Of
Suratgarh, At Present C/o Hari Singh Rajpurohit, Resident
Of Near Dudi Petrol Pump, Bangla Nagar, Bikaner.
6. Sugni Devi, Daughter Of Shri Bhanwar Lal, Wife Of Shri
Sukhdev Singh, By Caste Rajpurohit, Resident Of Purana
Shiv Mandir, Bangla Nagar, Bikaner.
7. Giriraj Singh, Son Of Late Shri Jagannath, By Caste
Rajpurohit, Resident Of Ward No. 15, Jhanwaron Ka
Chowk, Near Sadafate, Bikaner.
8. Gokul, Son Of Late Shri Jagannath, By Caste Rajpurohit,
Resident Of Ward No. 15, Jhanwaron Ka Chowk, Near
Sadafate, Bikaner.
9. Bithhal, Son Of Late Shri Jagannath, By Caste Rajpurohit,
Resident Of Ward No. 15, Jhanwaron Ka Chowk, Near
Sadafate, Bikaner.
10. Radhakishan, Son Of Late Shri Jagannath, By Caste
Rajpurohit, Resident Of Ward No. 15, Jhanwaron Ka
Chowk, Near Sadafate, Bikaner.
11. Asha Devi, Daughter Of Late Shri Jagannath, Wife Of Shri
Bhanwar Singh, By Caste Rajpurohit, Resident Of Near
Jeevannathji Ki Bagechi, Behind Chandveer, Dargah,
Jambheshwar Nagar, Bikaner.
(Downloaded on 10/03/2022 at 08:40:45 PM)
(2 of 5) [CW-4051/2017]
12. Shyama Devi, Daughter Of Late Shri Jagannath, Wife Of
Shri Rameshwar Singh, Resident Of Purohiton Ka Bas,
Rasisar, Tehsil Nokha, District Bikaner.
13. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The District Collector,
Bikaner.
14. The Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Gajrupdesar, District
Bikaner.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sanjay Mathur.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Virendra Acharya.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
Order 09/03/2022 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The present writ petition has been filed for quashing and setting aside the order dated 11.03.2016 (Annex.3) passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, Nokha District Bikaner whereby the objections preferred by the petitioner against the application for condonation of delay were rejected and order dated 20.09.2016 (Annex.4) passed by learned Board of Revenue, Rajasthan, Ajmer whereby the Revision Petition filed by the petitioner under section 84 of the Rajasthan land Revenue Act, 1956 was rejected.
Briefly the facts necessary to be narrated in short are that the respondent No.3 preferred an appeal against the mutation entry No.187 dated 15.06.1973 before the Sub Divisional Officer, Nokha District Bikaner along with an application under section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. In the application preferred under section 5 of the Limitation Act, the respondent No.3 submitted that the fact (Downloaded on 10/03/2022 at 08:40:45 PM) (3 of 5) [CW-4051/2017] regarding mutation entry dated 15.06.1973 came to his knowledge only on 07.01.2015 and thereafter, the matter was inquired and requisite documents were taken from the competent authorities. On coming to know about the names of the persons entered in the revenue record and finding that the name of the respondent No.3 was not reflected, the same was challenged by way of filing an appeal before the Sub Divisional Officer, Nokha District Bikaner. The respondent No.3 submitted that the delay caused in filing the appeal before the S.D.O., Nokha was bonafide and since the mutation entry made on 15.06.1973 was not within his knowledge, he was prevented by sufficient cause from filing an appeal.
The petitioner filed objections in the appeal preferred by the respondent No.3 before the Sub Divisional Officer, Nokha District Bikaner on 05.08.2015 contending that the appeal preferred by the respondent No.3 against the mutation entry No.187 dated 15.06.1973 is barred by limitation and no sufficient and good reasons have been given for condoning the delay. The Sub Divisional Officer, Nokha vide its order dated 11.03.2016 rejected the objections filed by the petitioner. Aggrieved against the same, the petitioner preferred a revision petition under section 84 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 before the learned Board of Revenue, Ajmer but the same was also dismissed by the Board of Revenue vide its order dated 20.09.2016. Aggrieved against the orders dated 11.03.2016 (Annex.3) and 20.09.2016 (Annex.4), the petitioner has preferred the instant writ petition before this court.
Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently submitted that the mutation entry made on 15.06.1973 was sought to be (Downloaded on 10/03/2022 at 08:40:45 PM) (4 of 5) [CW-4051/2017] challenged after a delay of 40 years and therefore, the reasons mentioned in the application seeking condonation of delay are frivolous and not sufficient for condoning the delay caused in filing the appeal before the Sub Divisional Officer, Nokha District Bikaner.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents has supported the order dated 11.03.2016 passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, Nokha District Bikaner and order dated 20.09.2016 passed by learned Board of Revenue, Ajmer.
I have considered the submissions made at the bar, gone through the order dated 11.03.2016 passed by Sub Divisional Officer, Nokha District Bikaner, order dated 20.09.2016 passed by learned Board of Revenue and also perused the relevant record.
The fact is that the respondent No.3 is heir of Heer Ji and has share in the property but in the revenue record, his name was not reflected. In these circumstances, he preferred an appeal before the Sub Divisional Officer, Nokha District Bikaner after a delay of 40 years on the ground that he was not aware about the mutation entry made on 15.06.1973 and the fact that his name is not reflected in the revenue record.
The fact that respondent No.3 filed an application under the Right to Information Act on 20.10.2014 before the Gram Panchayat, Gajrupdesar was replied by the Gram Panchayat and it was stated that the record of the entries was not available with the Panchayat, therefore, same could not be given. The respondent No.3 made efforts to know the names of the persons in whose names the mutation entries were made and in the process, he approached the competent authorities including the Panchayat and immediately on coming to know about details of (Downloaded on 10/03/2022 at 08:40:45 PM) (5 of 5) [CW-4051/2017] the mutation entry made on 15.06.1973, he preferred an appeal before the Sub Divisional Officer, Nokha District Bikaner. The reason given in the application for condonation of delay appears to be bonafide and sufficient, therefore, this court is of the view that the order dated 11.03.2016 passed by Sub Divisional Officer, Nokha District Bikaner rejecting the objections filed by the petitioner and order dated 20.09.2016 passed by the Board of Revenue rejecting revision petition of the petitioner are just and proper and do not call for any interference by this court.
Consequently, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is dismissed being bereft of merit.
In view of dismissal of the writ petition, all pending applications also stand dismissed accordingly.
It is made clear that any observation made in this order will not prejudice any party in the appeal pending before the Sub Divisional Officer, Nokha District Bikaner.
(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J 28-AnilSingh/-
(Downloaded on 10/03/2022 at 08:40:45 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)