Dismissed

Smt Sushila Jain v. State of Raj and Ors.

Rajasthan HC1 Aug 2011CW/5361/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court disposed of the third writ petition challenging the Tribunal's rejection of the petitioner's appeal. The court noted that the matter concerns land patta issuance and is pending with the Government, so no actionable grievance exists for the writ court.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition stands disposed of as the petitioner has no grievance until a decision is taken by the Government and J.D.A.

Smt Sushila Jain Vs State of Raj and Ors. — Property and Title | Rajasthan HC (2011)

¶1

-1-

¶2

S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.5361/2010.

¶3

Smt.Sushila Jain. VS. State of Raj. & Ors.

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR

¶5

ORDER

¶6

S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.5361/2010.

¶7

Smt.Sushila Jain. VERSUS State of Raj. & Ors.

¶8

01.08.2011.

¶9

Hon'ble Mr.Justice Dalip Singh

¶10

Mr.S.P.Mathur, for the petitioner. Mr.Zakir Hussain, Addl.Government Counsel for State. Mr.R.B.Mathur, for the respondent-JDA.

¶11

¶12

Notices of the writ petition was given to the counsel for the State as well as counsel for the J.D.A.

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶14

The prayer made in the writ petition while challenging the order passed by the learned Tribunal dated 19.01.2010 by which the appeal filed by the petitioner has been rejected by the learned Tribunal. The prayer of the petitioner is for issuing a direction to the J.D.A. to issue the patta to the petitioner and other plot holders of D-Block, Indrapuri Colony, Jaipur.

¶15

This is the third round of litigation as the petitioner has approached this court for the third time.

¶16

The petitioner's case is that the petitioner deposited the conversion charges in the year 1982 vide Annexures-3 and 4 and again for the second time in the year 2002 vide Annexure-19, as per the schemes floated by the Government and J.D.A. from time to time.

¶17

First time when the petitioner came before this court, the petitioner was directed to file a representation before

¶18

-2-

¶19

S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.5361/2010.

¶20

Smt.Sushila Jain. VS. State of Raj. & Ors.

¶21

the J.D.A. The petitioner accordingly approached the J.D.A. by means of a representation. The said representation of the petitioner was rejected and, therefore, the petitioner approached this court again. This court while disposing of the second writ petition, directed the petitioner to approach the learned Tribunal constituted under the J.D.A.Act, 1982 for redressal of his grievance. The petitioner accordingly filed an appeal before the learned J.D.A.Tribunal and the learned J.D.A.Tribunal vide impugned judgment dated 19.01.2010 (Annexure-3) has disposed of the appeal observing as follows:-

¶22

"अपीला�थ�या का मामला अभी लि�बत है और इस पर ज�व�ा �शासन ने �नण�य नह�ं �लया है, जो �नण�य रा�य सरकार के �नद�श के अनुसार �लया जाना है | इस आधार पर भी यह अपील सामा�य �कृ�त क� �तीत होती है | �य��गत कोई आदेश पा�रत भी नह�ं �कया गया है |

¶23

उपरो� �ववेचन क� आधार पर यह अपील �वीकार �कये जाने यो�य नह�ं है और ख़ा�रज �कये जाने यो�य है |”

¶24

A perusal of the above order passed by the learned Tribunal goes to show that the J.D.A. has not taken any decision with regard to the issuance of patta with regard to the land of the petitioner and further that the matter is still pending at the level of the Government and as and when the decision is taken by the Government, the J.D.A. would act in accordance with the same.

¶25

In view of the above, so far as the petitioner is concerned, the petitioner has no grievance. As and when the decision is taken by the Government and the J.D.A., the Government and J.D.A. is expected to convey the same to the petitioner in this behalf. In case the petitioner is aggrieved by the same, the petitioner would be entitled to seek recourse to the remedy as may be available under the law.

¶26

-3-

¶27

S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.5361/2010. Smt.Sushila Jain. VS. State of Raj. & Ors.

¶28

Having said so, it is made clear that till such time the Government and J.D.A. do not take a decision, no action or any action prejudicial to the rights of the petitioner would be taken by the Government and the J.D.A.

¶29

In the light of the aforesaid, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶30

(DALIP SINGH),J.

¶31

Solanki DS, Jr.P.A.

Smt Sushila Jain v. State of Raj and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Sushila Jain v. State of Raj and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vinood Vs Appellate Tribunal Jaipur andANR

M/S Jaipur Udyog Ltd. andANR Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Shakila and Ors. Vs Addi District Collector and Ors.

Chandra Gopal and Ors. Vs B O R Ajmer and Ors.

Janak Singh Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Parasher Motors Vs Baran Central Sahakari Bank Lt