The High Court of Rajasthan, Jodhpur followed a previous identical judgment to dispose of a writ petition involving agricultural land possession and stay applications against dispossession orders.
The writ petition and stay application are disposed of on identical terms to the previous order of 01.11.2018.
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.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10179/2019
Versus
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. S.S. Nirban
JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
Order
17/07/2019
Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the outset, submits that identical matter involving the identical issue, has been disposed of by this Court vide its order dated 01.11.2018 [S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.16992/2018 (Jannat & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.)] and prayed that similar order be passed in the present case also. The order dated 01.11.2018 reads thus:-
“Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. Perused the material available on record.
The petitioners claim to be in possession of a chunk of agricultural land in the village Nachana, District Jaisalmer through their ancestors, who
(2 of 2)
[CW-10179/2019]
were allegedly cultivating the land even before the enactment of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956. The petitioners received a notice under Section 22 of the Rajasthan Colonization Act treating them to be trespassers over the said chunk of land. They filed a suit for declaration under Sections 88, 188 read with Section 15 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act; and Sections 125 and 136 of the Land Revenue Act seeking a direction for declaration of their rights on the land in question. Alongwith the suit, they also filed an application for injunction under Section 212 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act read with Section 151 C.P.C.
A grievance is raised by the petitioners that on the one hand, the Dy. Commissioner (Colonization), IGNP, Nachana, District Jaisalmer is sitting tight over the petitioners’ suit and the injunction application and at the same time, the respondent authorities are bent upon to dispossess the petitioners from the land in question on which, they claimed entitlement by virtue of old possession.
Having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the Dy. Commissioner (Colonization), IGNP, Nachana before whom, the suit as wlel as injunction application of the petitioners are pending, is directed to expedite the proceedings of the suit and injunction application and shall try to conclude the same within a period of one year from the date of submission of copy of this order. Till the petitioners’ suit and injunction application are decided, they shall not be dispossessed from the land in question.
The writ ptition as well as stay applications are disposed of in these terms. ”
The present writ petition is also disposed of in the above terms. The Stay Application No.10107/2019 also stands disposed of accordingly.
(DINESH MEHTA),J
38-skm/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the identical issue disposed of in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.16992/2018 should be decided similarly in the present petition.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Jannat & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.Followed¶16
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.16992/2018 (Jannat & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.)
4 provisions across 3 enactments
TALAB KHAN S/O NASIR KHAN AND ORS.
STATE OF RAJASTHAN THROUGH COMMISSIONER COLONIZATION BIKANER
DINESH MEHTA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
