Dismissed

Sanwalya @Sanwal Ram v. Municipal Board Dausa and Ors.

Rajasthan HC19 Oct 2016CW/5285/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order dismisses three civil writ petitions challenging a District Collector's order cancelling pattas. The Court found that allotment lacked necessary procedures, the patta might be forged, and a parallel civil suit for injunction was dismissed. Thus, no illegality was found in the cancellation.

What did the court decide?

All the three writ petitions were dismissed.

Sanwalya @Sanwal Ram Vs Municipal Board Dausa and Ors. — Rajasthan HC (2016) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

¶3

JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR

¶4

ORDER

¶5

1.SB Civil Writ Petition No.5288/2008

¶6

Raghuvir Prasad Meena son of Shri Prabhu Meena, resident of village Sidoli, tehsil and district Dausa (presently residing at Somnath Colony, tehsil and district Dausa).

¶7

...Petitioner

¶8

Versus

¶9

Municipal Board, dausa through its Executive Officer.

¶10

Gram Panchayat Bhakari, Panchayat Samiti Dausa, district Dausa through its Sarpanch.

¶11

Collector, Dausa.

¶12

….Respondents

¶13

2.S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5285/2008

¶14

Sanwalya alias Sanwal Ram son of Shri Ram Gopal Meena, resident of village Surajpura, tehsil and district Dausa (presently residing at Somnath Colony, tehsil and district Dausa).

¶15

...Petitioner

¶16

Versus

¶17

Municipal Board, Dausa through its Executive Officer.

¶18

Gram Panchayat Bhakari, Panchayat Samiti Dausa, district Dausa

¶19

through its Sarpanch.

¶20

Collector, Dausa.

¶21

...Respondents

¶22

¶23

3.S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5287/2008

¶24

Badri Narain son of Shri Bhonri Lal, by caste Meena, resident of village Ramsinghpura, Gram Panchayat Ratnavata, tehsil and district Dausa (presently residing at Somnath Colony, tehsil and district Dausa).

¶25

…..Petitioner

¶26

Versus

¶27

Municipal Board, Dausa through its Executive Officer.

¶28

Gram Panchayat Bhakari, Panchayat Samiti Dausa, district Dausa

¶29

through its Sarpanch.

¶30

Collector, Dausa

¶31

..Respondents

¶32

19.10.2016

¶33

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MN BHANDARI

¶34

Mr DK Dixit– for petitioner/s

¶35

Mr Nawal Singh Sikarwar

¶36

Mr Rajesh Chaturvedi – for respondents BY THE COURT:

¶37

By these writ petitions, a challenge is made to the order

¶38

dated 14.2.2008 passed by the District Collector, Dausa on a revision petition against cancellation of patta.

¶39

Learned counsel for respondents submits that a civil suit

¶40

was filed by the petitioners to seek permanent injunction but it has

¶41

¶42

been dismissed. A finding has been recorded that the petitioners have failed to show title in the land in dispute apart from possession. After dismissal of the suit, nothing survives in it.

¶43

Learned counsel for petitioners submits that they have no information about filing of the civil suit by the petitioners but statement has been made by learned counsel for respondents.

¶44

I have considered the submissions of the parties and perused the record.

¶45

It is a case where patta was issued by the Gram Panchayat – Bhakri, Panchayat Samiti – Dausa, District – Dausa in favour of petitioners. The revision petitions were preferred against issuance of the patta and the said petitions were decided by the learned Collector cancelling patta issued in favour of the petitioners. It is found that allotment of land was made without undertaking required procedure and the patta may be even forged. The petitioners seems to have pursuaded the remedy before the civil court as well to seek injunction but the suit therein has been dismissed. In view of the aforesaid, nothing survives in the present writ petitions and, otherwise, I do not find any illegality in the order cancelling patta issued in favour of the petitioners. The writ petitions are otherwise pending for last 8 years and no interim order exist thus presumption exist for giving effect to the order cancelling pattas and it may be that

¶46

¶47

land is subsequently, allotted to others or used for any other purpose.

¶48

In the result, all the writ petitions are dismissed.

¶49

A copy of this order be placed in each connected file.

¶50

(MN Bhandari) J.

¶51

bnsharma

Sanwalya @Sanwal Ram v. Municipal Board Dausa and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanwalya @Sanwal Ram v. Municipal Board Dausa and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ratan Lal Saini Vs Court of Appellate Tribunal J

M/S Arora Enterprises Vs Raj Financial Corporation and or

Th Laxman Singh Shekhawat Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Bhartiya Vidya Bhawan Vs State Local Self Dep Ors.

Nitin Shiksha Samiti and Ors. Vs Jaipur Municipal Corp and Ors.

National Engineering Indus Anr. Vs State Finance Departmentanr