Dismissed

Bhagirath and Others v. State of Raj. and Ors.

Rajasthan HC1 Nov 2023CW/273/2000

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged Rule 13-A (vii) alleging inconsistency with the Act, 1954. The Bench disposed of the writ petition in the same terms as a prior Division Bench decision, upholding the rule's prospective nature regarding pre-amendment allotments and quashing additional demands.

What did the court decide?

Additional demands raised under Rule 13-A (vii) were declared null and void; writ petition disposed of in same terms as prior order.

Bhagirath and Others Vs State of Raj. and Ors. — Land Acquisition | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023:RJ-JD:37081]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 273/2000

Bhagirath And Others

----Petitioner

Versus

State Of Raj. And Ors.

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajednra Katariya For Respondent(s) : Mr. I.S. Pareek

¶10

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

¶11

Order

¶12

01/11/2023

¶13

This writ petition has been preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India claiming the following reliefs :-

¶14

"(i) The provisions of Rule 13-A (vii) of the Rules, 1975 may be declared ultra vires and quashed being inconsistent and contrary Section 7 and 28 of the Act, 1954.

¶15

(ii) That without prejudice to the aforesaid, it may be declared that at the most the provision of Rule 13-A (vii) of the Rules, 1975 is prospective in nature and came into force w.e.f. the date when it was introduced and it will not affect the allotments of the petitioners which were made prior to coming into force of this rule.

¶16

(iii) The the additional demands raised by the respondents against the petitioners under Rule 13-A (vii) as mentioned in Annex.P/5 to Annex.P/8 may be declared null and void. Further, it may be declared that the respondents are not competent to demand additional price of the land in question from the petitioners."

¶17

(2 of 3) [CW-273/2000]

¶18

[2023:RJ-JD:37081]

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the controversy involved in this writ petition has already been decided by the Division Bench of this Hon'ble Court in Surja Ram & Ors.

¶20

Vs. State of Rajasthan & ors. (D.B. Civil Writ No.4463/1999) , decided on 03.08.2018. The order dated 03.08.2018 reads as under :-

¶21

"1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶22

2. We need not to decide the vires of Sub-rule 2 of Rule 24 of the Rajasthan Colonisation (Allotment and Sale of Government Land in Indira Gandhi Canal Colony Area) Rules 1975, for the reason a Division bench of this Court in the decision reported as 1997(2) WLC (Raj.) 626, State of Rajasthan & Ors. Vs. Hajari Ram & 21 Anr. has held that rule to be prospective and not applicable to those whom land was allotted pursuant to the notification dated 23.11.1985.

¶23

3. Relevant would it to be note that to rehabilitate persons who were dispossessed from their lands when the Mahajan Field Range, Bikaner was established land was allotted in Bikaner district and price charged was as per the notification dated 23.11.1985.

¶24

4. Sub-rule 2 of Rule 24 was inserted in Rules of 1975 on 04.02.1992 which permitted the Government to charge enhanced money from those who were allotted land in command area. Based on the amendment additional demands were raised.

¶25

5. The Division Bench held that those to whom land were allotted prior to the amendment no extra money could be demanded because the amendment was prospective and not retrospective.

¶26

6. In the instant case the allotment of land to the petitioners is prior to the date when amendment was made to the rules and thus we dispose of the writ

(3 of 3)

[2023:RJ-JD:37081]

[CW-273/2000]

petition quashing the additional demands raised upon the writ petitioners."

¶31

In light of the aforequoted order, the present writ petition is also disposed of in the same terms. All pending applications also stand disposed of.

¶32

(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J

¶33

8-Sudheer/-

Bhagirath and Others v. State of Raj. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhagirath and Others v. State of Raj. and Ors.

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

Anju Shiksha Samiti Vs State of Rajasthan

Gitanjali Shikshan Sansthan Vs State of Rajasthan

Govindram Laxminarayan Ladnu Vs State of Rajasthan

Joga Ram Vs Board of Revenue and Ors.

Hari Ram Vs State and Ors.

Khiv Raj Vs Municipal Board,Sojat,Thro.Exe.Officer