Dismissed

Kamalprabha v. Veena Pradhan

Rajasthan HC7 Dec 2021CW/12501/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The writ petition challenged the Board of Revenue's order rejecting an application to transfer a land appeal. The court found no reason to interfere with the rejection order given the already overburdened court dockets and dismissed the petition without costs.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is dismissed without imposition of cost on the petitioner. The stay application is disposed of.

Kamalprabha Vs Veena Pradhan — Land Acquisition | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

(1 of 3)

¶2

[CW-12501/2021]

¶3

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶4

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12501/2021

¶5

Kamalprabha W/o Manakchand, Aged About 70 Years, By Caste Saravagi Luhariya, R/o Ajmer, Tehsil And District Ajmer Through Their Power Of Attorney Holder Shri Jagdish Prasad S/o Nolaram, By Caste Jat, R/o Dungarwas, Tehsil Laxmangarh, District Sikar (Raj.).

¶6

Nirmal S/o Manakchand, Aged About 50 Years, By Caste Saravagi Luhariya, R/o Ajmer, Tehsil And District Ajmer Through Their Power Of Attorney Holder Shri Jagdish Prasad S/o Nolaram, By Caste Jat, R/o Dungarwas, Tehsil Laxmangarh, District Sikar (Raj.).

¶7

Praveen S/o Manakchand, Aged About 47 Years, By Caste Saravagi Luhariya, R/o Ajmer, Tehsil And District Ajmer Through Their Power Of Attorney Holder Shri Jagdish Prasad S/o Nolaram, By Caste Jat, R/o Dungarwas, Tehsil Laxmangarh, District Sikar (Raj.).

¶8

----Petitioners

¶9

Versus

¶10

Veena Pradhan, Presiding Officer Of The Court Of Divisional Commissioner, Ajmer.

¶11

Pramod Kumar S/o Mahendra Kumar, By Caste Mahajan, R/o Nawa, Tehsil Nawa, District Nagaur, Presently Residing At Udaipur.

¶12

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Tehsildar, Nawa, District Nagaur.

¶13

The Sub Registrar, Nawa, District Nagaur.

¶14

Mala W/o Lokendra, By Caste Mahajan, R/o Nawa, District Nagaur, Presently Residing At New Keshav Nagar University Road, Udaipur.

¶15

Abhinav S/o Lokendra, By Caste Mahajan, R/o Nawa, District Nagaur, Presently Residing At New Keshav Nagar University Road, Udaipur.

¶16

Preeti D/o Lokendra, By Caste Mahajan, R/o Nawa, District Nagaur, Presently Residing At New Keshav Nagar University Road, Udaipur.

¶17

Monika D/o Lokendra, By Caste Mahajan, R/o Nawa, District Nagaur, Presently Residing At New Keshav Nagar

¶18

(2 of 3)

¶19

[CW-12501/2021]

¶20

University Road, Udaipur.

¶21

Neetu D/o Lokendra, By Caste Mahajan, R/o Nawa, District Nagaur, Presently Residing At New Keshav Nagar University Road, Udaipur.

¶22

Pratibha D/o Lokendra, By Caste Mahajan, R/o Nawa, District Nagaur, Presently Residing At New Keshav Nagar University Road, Udaipur.

¶23

Tara W/o Mahendra Kumar @ Manakchand, By Caste Mahajan, R/o Nawa, District Nagaur, Presently Residing At New Keshav Nagar University Road, Udaipur.

¶24

Rekha D/o Mahendra Kumar @ Manakchand, By Caste Mahajan, R/o Nawa, District Nagaur, Presently Residing At New Keshav Nagar University Road, Udaipur.

¶25

Pramila D/o Mahendra Kumar @ Manakchand, By Caste Mahajan, R/o Nawa, District Nagaur, Presently Residing At New Keshav Nagar University Road, Udaipur.

¶26

Bindu D/o Mahendra Kumar @ Manakchand, By Caste Mahajan, R/o Nawa, District Nagaur, Presently Residing At New Keshav Nagar University Road, Udaipur.

¶27

Vibha D/o Mahendra Kumar @ Manakchand, By Caste Mahajan, R/o Nawa, District Nagaur, Presently Residing At New Keshav Nagar University Road, Udaipur.

¶28

Ramesh S/o Manakchand, By Caste Saravagi Luhadriya, R/o Ajmer, Tehsil And District Ajmer.

¶29

----Respondents

¶30

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. B.R. Chahar
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Darshan Jain for Mr. Vinay Jain

¶31

JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

¶32

Order

¶33

07/12/2021

¶34

The present writ petition is preferred against the order dated 06.08.2021, whereby Board of Revenue has rejected petitioners’ application under Section 53 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act,

¶35

(3 of 3)

¶36

[CW-12501/2021]

¶37

seeking transfer of the appeal pending before the Divisional Commissioner.

¶38

While rejecting petitioners’ application for transfer of the appeal, the learned Member, Board of Revenue, has observed that the application filed by the petitioners is casual and does not bring out any reason for which the appeal requires to be transferred. 3. Mr. Chahar, learned counsel for the petitioners argued that the Divisional Commissioner after hearing the matter on merit is giving date of the appeal every week and is bent upon to decide the appeal in favour of the respondents.

¶39

Mr. Jain, learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand submitted that the petitioners have approached this Court challenging the order of the Revenue Board dated 06.08.2021 and at the same time have been seeking adjournment before the Divisional Commissioner citing that the present writ petition is pending.

¶40

Be that as it may. This Court, does not find any reason to interfere in the order dated 06.08.2021, whereby petitioners’ application for transfer of the appeal has been rejected. 6. Such matters deserve to be deprecated having regard to already overburdened dockets of the Court.

¶41

The writ petition is dismissed, however, without imposition of cost on the petitioner.

¶42

Stay application also stands disposed of accordingly.

¶43

(DINESH MEHTA),J

¶44

159-Rahul/-

Kamalprabha v. Veena Pradhan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kamalprabha v. Veena Pradhan

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

Manohar Lal Pamech Vs Neelkanth Fertility and Women Care Hospital Pvt. Ltd.

President Bahujan Smajvadi Party Unit Badnore Vs Smt. Sita Devi

M/S Hpcl Rajasthan Refinery Ltd. Vs Indra Singh

Karandeep Exims Pvt. Ltd. Vs Bank of Baroda

M/S Dasmesh Buildcon Vs Union of India

Babu Lal Vs State