HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7446/2014
Bhagadi Lal ----Petitioner
Versus
State And Ors. ----Respondent
Connected With
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7445/2014
Roop Lal ----Petitioner
Versus
State And Ors. ----Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7447/2014
Mangi Lal ----Petitioner
Versus
State And Ors. ----Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7449/2014
Nathu Lal ----Petitioner
Versus
State And Ors. ----Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7457/2014
Chaturbhuj ----Petitioner
Versus
State And Ors. ----Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7458/2014
Devi Lal ----Petitioner
Versus
State And Ors. ----Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7459/2014
Chunni Lal ----Petitioner
Versus
State And Ors. ----Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7462/2014
Panna Lal ----Petitioner
Versus
State And Ors. ----Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7463/2014
Vagadiya ----Petitioner
Versus
State And Ors. ----Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7464/2014
Vardha ----Petitioner
Versus
State And Ors. ----Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7699/2014
Unkar Lal ----Petitioner
Versus
State And Ors. ----Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7700/2014
Unkar ----Petitioner
Versus
State And Ors. ----Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7798/2014
Ratan Lal ----Petitioner
Versus
State And Ors. ----Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7799/2014
Kishan Lal ----Petitioner
Versus
State And Ors. ----Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7800/2014
Devi Lal ----Petitioner
Versus
State And Ors. ----Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7802/2014
Narayan ----Petitioner
Versus
State And Ors. ----Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7804/2014
Laxman ----Petitioner
Versus
State And Ors. ----Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7823/2014
Ram Lal ----Petitioner
Versus
State And Ors. ----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. R.S. Chundawat
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manish Tak, G.C.
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
25/02/2022
01. In the wake of instant surge in COVID - 19 cases and spread of its highly infectious Omicron variant, abundant caution is being maintained, while hearing the matters in the Court, for the safety of all concerned.
02.The petitioner has preferred this petition with the following prayers:
"It is, therefore, most humbly and respectfully prayed that the writ petition of the petitioner may kindly be allowed and: -
(i) by an appropriate writ, order or direction the impugned order dated 24.09.2012 (Annexure-1) passed by District Collector, Udaipur cancelling the patta issued in favour of petitioner be quashed.
(ii) by an appropriate writ, order or direction the order dated 23.09.2013 (Annexure-12) in review application be quashed."
03. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that certain appeals under Section 75 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 were filed before the learned Revenue Appellate Authority, Udaipur against the order dated 23.10.2006 passed by the District Collector, Udaipur, whereby certain 'charaga' lands of the Gram Panchayat, Jetpura, Tehsil Valabh Nagar, District Udaipur, were converted into residential plots, beyond the sanctioned limit and without hearing, and allotted to the Nagar Palika, Bhinder.
04. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the learned R.A.A., vide order dated 12.03.2008, recorded the findings, that the right over 'charaga land' is that of the Gram Sabha, and any such allotment made would have to be made only with the agreement of the concerned Gram Sabha, and that the Patwari Report clearly stated that the concerned Gram Sabha was not consulted or heard before making such allotment, and that the land much beyond the sanctioned limit was converted.
05. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the learned R.A.A. partially upheld the said order of the concerned District Collector, to the extent of sanctioned conversion of land, and with regard to the unsanctioned lands for which permission was not acquired, remanded the matter back to the concerned District Collector with the direction to provide an opportunity of hearing to the concerned Gram Panchayat and pass fresh orders.
06. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner's claims are not sustainable in the eye of law as the claims made are pertaining to 'charaga' lands which were incorrectly mutated in the land revenue records. And that, the provision of law laid down in Section 92 of the Land Revenue Act, 1956 categorically debars the use of such lands for any other purpose other than as pasture lands, and that the same is laid down under Section 16 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 wherein no khaatedari right shall accrue in relation to pasture land. Furthermore, Rule 7 (1) of the Rajasthan Tenancy (Government) Rules, 1955 provides as under:
"7. Allotment or setting apart of pasture land. -
(1) The Collector may, in consultation with the Panchayat, change the classification of any pasture land, as defined in sub-section (28) of Section 5 of the Act or any pasture land set- apart under Section 92 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 (Rajasthan Act 15 of 1956), as unoccupied culturable Government land (Sawai Chak), for allotment for agricultural or any non-agricultural purposes:
Provided that in case where the area of the land sought to be so allotted or setapart exceeds 4 hectares, the Collector shall obtain prior permission of the State Government :
Provided further that the classification of pasture land shall not be changed as unoccupied culturable government land (Sawai Chak) for mining purposes without the prior permission of the State Government. The permission by the State Government shall be granted only if applicant has surrendered equal area of khatedari land in favour of the State Government in the same village or nearby village within the same Panchayat, if applicant is not able to surrender khatedari land in the same village or nearby village within the same Panchayat, the equal area of khatedari land may be surrendered in the nearby village of adjoining Panchayat and if the land is not available even in the adjoining Panchayat for such purpose, it may be surrendered, in exceptional cases from the other Panchayat of the District and has deposited development charges for the development of such surrendered land as pasture land. The development charges for the year 2017-2018 shall be rupees fifty thousand per bigha or part thereof and for subsequent year it shall be increased by five percent every year. The Development charges so deposited may also be used for the welfare of the cattle of the village by the village Panchayat with prior approval of the District Collector. The land so classified as unoccupied culturable government land (Sawai Chak) shall always remain and treated as government land for all purposes; Provided also that any such land, falling within the boundary limits of the Jaipur Region as defined in the Jaipur Development Authority Act, 1982 (Act No. 25 of 1982) or within the periphery of 2 kms. of a municipality, shall not be allotted except for the purpose of a public utility institution or for expansion of abadi.
(2) Where classification of any pasture land is changed under sub-rule (1), the Collector may set-apart an equal area of unoccupied culturable Government land, if available, as pasture land in the same village or nearby village within the same Panchayat:
Provided that where land is required for infrastructure projects viz air strip, lift irrigation, pumping station government buildings, government offices, shamshan, kabristan, gaushala and rehabilitation purpose and unoccupied culturable government land is not available in the same village or nearby village within the same Panchayat and the necessity is absolute necessity and absence of alternative means is proved, the equal area of unoccupied culturable land may be set apart in the nearby village of adjoining Panchayat. If land is not available in the adjoining Panchayat for such purpose, it may be set apart, in exceptional cases, from the other Panchayat of the District with the prior approval of the State Government.]
07. Learned counsel for the respondents further submits that the judgments dated 24.09.2012 and 23.09.2013 passed by the competent authority are perfectly in accordance with the law.
08. Heard learned counsel for both parties and perused the record of the case.
09. This Court observes that the concerned District Collector, vide order dated 24.09.2012, stated that the relevant revenue records were corrected and the said lands in question were recorded as 'charaga' lands, in pursuance of the direction issued in the above mentioned order passed by the learned R.A.A. And that, the allotment of land was made to certain persons during the period when it was incorrectly mutated and entered into the revenue records as 'abadi' lands, although it was formerly and subsequently, after correction also recorded as 'charaga' lands.
10. This Court further observes that the judgment, dated 24.09.2012, passed by the concerned District Collector rightly drew strength from the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Jagpal Singh and Ors. Vs. State of Punjab and Ors. (2011) 11 SCC 396 wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court observed that encroachment of property, by way of illegal construction or alienation of property cannot be permissible and directed that land be handed over back to the Gram Panchayat.
11. This Court further observes that the judgment, dated 23.09.2013, at Annexure-12, passed by the concerned District Collector, on a review of the aforementioned judgment dated 24.09.2012 preferred by the petitioners therein, wherein the concerned District Collector observed that no basis for review arise as the relevant provisions of law as stated in aforementioned judgment apply squarely to the facts and circumstances of the said case, and that no new grounds for same relief being sought, were raised by the petitioners therein.
12. This Court, in light of the aforesaid observations, finds that the impugned judgments do not suffer from any legal infirmity, and therefore the present case is not a fit case warranting any interference by this Court.
13. Consequently, the present petitions are dismissed. All pending applications stand disposed of.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J.
No comments:
Post a Comment