This court dismissed the writ petition challenging the notice under Section 91 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 against the petitioner. Holding that the petitioner is an encroacher and authorities are proceeding in accordance with law, the court found no cause of interference and disposed of pending applications.
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.
[2023:RJ-JD:26361]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10994/2023
Kishan Singh S/o Prahlad Singh, Aged About 32 Years, R/o 18, Purohito Ka Bass, Phulasar, Tehsil Phalsund, Jaisalmer (Rajasthan).
----Petitioner
Versus
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. DK Godara. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sunil Beniwal, AAG.
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
19/08/2023
The instant writ petition has been preferred claiming the following reliefs:-
“By an appropriate writ order or direction, the impugned notice dated 01.08.2022 (Annex.2) issued by the respondent No.5 Deputy Tehsildar, Phalsund, District Jaisalmer to the petitioner as well as the impugned order dated 25.07.2023 (Annexure 05) and the entire proceedings as initiated pursuant thereto against the petitioner may kindly be declared illegal and accordingly, be quashed and set aside.
B. By any other appropriate, writ, direction or order the respondent authorities may kindly be restrained from
(2 of 2)
[2023:RJ-JD:26361]
[CW-10994/2023]
dispossession the petitioner from the plot in question without following due process of law.
C. By any other appropriate, writ, direction or order the respondent authorities may kindly be directed to regularize possession of the petitioner over the plot in dispute in accordance with the ‘Swamitva Scheme’ (Annex.3) framed by the State Government forthwith.”
The petitioner is an encroacher and the notice under Section 91 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 of the proceedings has to take place in accordance with the earlier order passed by this Court.
It is apparent from the record that the respondents are proceeding in accordance with law.
In view of the above, no cause of interference is made out in the present petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. All pending applications stand disposed of.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.
204-/Jitender//-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging the notice under Section 91 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 and the subsequent proceedings requires judicial interference.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Kishan Singh
State Of Rajasthan
District Collector, Jaisalmer
Deputy Tehsildar, Phalsund
PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
