The High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking interim stay and quashing of an ejectment notice under Section 91 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956, as it was premature and alternative remedy via District Collector was available.
Petitioner granted one week time to file appeal before District Collector; status quo maintained pending appeal.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
SBCWP NO.1292/08.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH JAIPUR.
O R D E R
Shyama Devi
Versus
State of Rajasthan and others
S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITON NO.1292/2008.
Date of order :- 13/2/2008.
HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ
Shri Dinesh Yadav for the petitioner.
The writ petition has been filed with a prayer to set-aside the notice dated 10/7/2007 issued by the Tehsildar Jamvaramgarh under Section 91 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 whereby petitioner has been asked to dispossess him from the land bearing Khasra No.374 and 375 situated in Village Rajpura Bas, Tala, Tehsil Jamwaramgarh, District Jaipur on account of some illegal construction being raised therein.
I am afraid, writ petition against the order of the Tehsildar cannot be directly entertained by this court as the petitioner has an alternative remedy of approaching to the District Collector Jaipur against such order particularly when proceedings under Section 91 of the Act of 1956 are still pending.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the notice dated 10/7/2007 may be quashed. Letter dated 10/7/2007 is nothing but a simple notice. The writ petition against the impugned notice cannot be entertained. It is further contended that the order be passed against the respondents that in case eventually proceedings are decided against the petitioner, 10 days time to the petitioner may be granted to avail the alternative remedy. I am afraid, such an order cannot be passed. The writ petition itself has been filed at premature stage and is therefore not maintainable.
An appeal may be filed before the District Collector within a week from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Till then, status-quo with regard to the land in question shall be maintained. The District Collector Jaipur shall upon filing appeal, decide the same in accordance with law and if necessity arises, may also order passing interim-order.
The writ petition is therefore dismissed being not maintainable though with the above direction.
(MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J.
anil
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition filed to quash the ejectment notice under Section 91 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 is maintainable when alternative remedy exists.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Shyama Devi
State of Rajasthan
others
Mohammad Rafiq
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court