Writ petition challenging Collector and Board of Revenue orders regarding land sale agreement contrary to Ceiling Rules dismissed; lower courts' findings of fact upheld.
Petition dismissed; stay application dismissed.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR
O R D E R
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.19094/2013 (Satya Narayan & Ors. v. State of Raj. & Ors.) Date of Order: 26/10/2015
PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA
Mr. Sanjay Mehrishi, for the petitioners.
The present petition has been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India to assail the order dated 27.2.2001 passed by the District Collector, Jhalawar in M.I. No.64/Appeal/ 2001 and the order dated 30.4.2013 passed by the Board of Revenue, Rajasthan, Ajmer.
Admittedly, petitioner No.3 had sold the land in dispute vide an agreement to sell in favour of petitioners No.1 and 2. Said sale was in contravention of the Ceiling Rules which require that in the first year 50% of the land ought to be cultivated by the allottee and in second year the entire land shall be cultivated by the allottee in whose favour land has been allotted. Two courts below have given concurrent finding of fact that the petitioners in the second year of allotment in violation of the rules for allotment, had sold the land vide an agreement to sell.
Shri Sanjay Mehrishi learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has submitted that the land in question was sold by way of an agreement to sell, but possession thereof was not delivered. Hence, allottee continued to be in possession and had cultivated the land in first and second year.
Two courts below have given a finding of fact contrary to the assertion made by Shri Mehrishi. This court being a third court will not disturb the concurrent finding of fact and will not reappreciate the facts.
Hence, the present petition being devoid of merit is hereby, dismissed. The Stay application is also dismissed.
(KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA),J.
Govind/-
All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed.
Govind Sharma, Sr.PA
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the lower courts' finding of fact that petitioners sold land and sold from the allottee violated ceiling rules should be disturbed on appeal.
Satya Narayan & Ors.
State of Raj. & Ors.
K. N. Singh Ahluwalia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
