Disposed

Sattar Khan v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC22 Feb 2021CW/1455/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court, relying on a recent judgment with similar facts, disposed of the writ petition and stay application. It directed the Assistant Commissioner to expedite pending suit and injunction proceedings for one year and ordered that petitioners not be dispossessed of the land during this period.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners had not been dispossessed pending the conclusion of their suit and injunction application within one year.

Sattar Khan Vs State of Rajasthan — Writ and Judicial Review | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1455/2021

¶3

Sattar Khan S/o Goram Khan, Aged About 60 Years, By Caste Musalman, R/o Mandau, Tehsil And District Jaisalmer (Raj.).

¶4

Sakur Khan S/o Kada Khan, Aged About 45 Years, By Caste Musalman, R/o Mandau, Tehsil And District Jaisalmer (Raj.).

¶5

Madine Khan S/o Kadar Khan, Aged About 44 Years, By Caste Musalman, R/o Mandau, Tehsil And District Jaisalmer (Raj.).

¶6

Fatma D/o Kadar Khan, Aged About 44 Years, By Caste Musalman, R/o Mandau, Tehsil And District Jaisalmer (Raj.).

¶7

Bilawal Khan S/o Kadar Khan, Aged About 40 Years, By Caste Musalman, R/o Mandau, Tehsil And District Jaisalmer (Raj.).

¶8

Hanif Khan S/o Kadar Khan, Aged About 38 Years, By Caste Musalman, R/o Mandau, Tehsil And District Jaisalmer (Raj.).

¶9

Pathan Khan S/o Kadar Khan, Aged About 36 Years, By Caste Musalman, R/o Mandau, Tehsil And District Jaisalmer (Raj.).

¶10

----Petitioners

¶11

Versus

¶12

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Colonization Departent, Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶13

Commissioner (Colonization), Bikaner.

¶14

Assistant Commissioner (Colonization) Mohangarh, District Jaisalmer.

¶15

Tehsildar (Colonization) Mohangarh No-2, District Jaisalmer.

¶16

----Respondents

¶17

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. AR Godara For Respondent(s) :

¶18

(2 of 3)

¶19

[CW-1455/2021]

¶20

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

¶21

Order

¶22

22/02/2021

¶23

In wake of onslaught of COVID-19, abundant caution is being taken while hearing the matters in Court.

¶24

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that similarly situated persons were granted following order in the matter of Ramesh Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.978/2021), decided on 18.01.2021 .

¶25

"Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. Perused the material available on record.

¶26

The petitioners claim to be in possession of a chunk of agricultural land in the village Mohangarh, District Jaisalmer through their ancestors, who 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 Section151 C.P.C.

¶27

A grievance is raised by the petitioners that on the one hand, the Assistant Commissioner (Colonization), Mohangarh, 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.

¶28

(3 of 3) [CW-1455/2021]

¶29

Having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the Assistant Commissioner (Colonization), Mohangarh, before whom, the suit as well 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.

¶30

The writ petition as well as stay application are disposed of in these terms."

¶31

In light of the aforequoted judgment, the present writ petition is disposed of in the same terms. Stay petition as well as all pending applications stand disposed of.

¶32

(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J.

¶33

22-Sudheer/-

Sattar Khan v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sattar Khan v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Birbal Khan Vs State of Rajasthan

Rnb Global University Vs the National Council for Teacher Education

M/S. Jhinjha Filling Station Vs Union of India

Sita Devi Vs State

Gumana Ram Vs Jodhpur Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd.

Gandhi Vidya Mandir, Sardarshahr Vs the Union of India