This order dismisses two connected writ petitions challenging land allotment decisions. The High Court upheld the Revenue Appellate Authority and Board of Revenue's findings that the petitioner failed to meet allotment conditions and the allotment to the private respondent was lawful.
Writ petitions dismissed with no merit found.
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.
[2024:RJ-JD:15530]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15442/2023
Sattar Khan S/o Kadar Baksh, Aged About 52 Years, by caste Musalman, R/o Chak 5, N.g.m. Tehsil Pugal, District Bikaner.
----Petitioner
Versus
----Respondents
Connected With
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16911/2023
Sattar Khan S/o Kadar Baksh, Aged About 52 Years, By Caste Musalman, R/o Chak 5, N.g.m. Tehsil Pugal, District Bikaner.
----Petitioner
Versus
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Abhyudai Singh for Mr. Anil Kumar Singh For Respondent(s) : Mr. R.S. Choudhary
(2 of 9)
[2024:RJ-JD:15530]
[CW-15442/2023]
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
Order
08/04/2024
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15442/2023 :
[2024:RJ-JD:15530]
[CW-15442/2023]
(3 of 9)
24.08.2023 dismissed the revision petition of the petitioner. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed.
[2024:RJ-JD:15530]
[CW-15442/2023]
(4 of 9)
favour of the private respondent. He submits that the learned Appellate Authority and Revisional Authority have not appreciated the facts canvassed before it and, therefore, have committed an error while passing the orders impugned. He, therefore, prays that the writ petition may be allowed and the allotment made in favour of the private respondent No.5 may be quashed and set aside.
(5 of 9)
[2024:RJ-JD:15530]
[CW-15442/2023]
Revenue Appellate Authority has considered the submissions made by the petitioner in detail and has rightly come to the conclusion that the land which is in possession of the petitioner has been allotted to the private respondent after following due process of law and since the petitioner failed to deposit the amount for allotment of land, the allotment was not made in his favour. There is no material on record which shows that the private respondent has misrepresented the facts before the allotment authority and has got the land allotted in his favour which should have been allotted to the petitioner. Even the FIR filed by the petitioner against the private respondent was also found baseless as negative Final Report has been filed in that FIR. The finding of Revenue Appellate Authority has been affirmed by the Board of Revenue by passing a detailed order dated 24.08.2023 after dealing and recording the contentions of the petitioner.
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16911/2023 :
[2024:RJ-JD:15530]
[CW-15442/2023]
(6 of 9)
[2024:RJ-JD:15530]
[CW-15442/2023]
(7 of 9)
petitioner. He submits that the allotment made in favour of the private respondent was assailed by the petitioner by way of filing an appeal before the Revenue Appellate Authority, Bikaner, but the Revenue Appellate Authority, Bikaner, without considering the facts in right perspective rejected the appeal preferred by the petitioner. He further submits that against the order of Appellate Authority, the petitioner preferred a revision petition before learned Board of Revenue, Rajasthan, Ajmer but the same was also dismissed. Learned counsel, therefore, submits that the order of the Revenue Appellate Authority, Bikaner and the Revisional Authority on the face of it are incorrect as the petitioner being in possession of the land in question is a poor agriculturist who is unaware of the procedure of allotment of the land and since the amount was given to the private respondent No.5 for depositing the same with the respondents, he did not deposit the same, thus, the allotment was not made in his favour and after 10 years, by misrepresenting the facts, the said land has been allotted in favour of the private respondent. He submits that the learned Appellate Authority and Revisional Authority have not appreciated the facts canvassed before it and, therefore, have committed an error while passing the orders impugned. He, therefore, prays that the writ petition may be allowed and the allotment made in favour of the private respondent No.5 may be quashed and set aside.
[2024:RJ-JD:15530]
[CW-15442/2023]
(8 of 9)
that there is no procedural irregularity in allotment of the land made in favour of the private respondent. He further submits that the respondent has not misrepresented any fact to deprive the allotment of the land in favour of the petitioner. He submits that the Revenue Appellate Authority as well as the Revisional Authority have rightly passed the orders impugned in the present writ petition. He also submits that after allotment of the land in favour of the private respondent, the Khatedari rights have also been granted in his favour. He further submits that after issuance of the challan in the year 1999, the petitioner has not approached any authority for allotment of land in his favour. He, therefore, prays that the writ petition may be dismissed.
[2024:RJ-JD:15530]
[CW-15442/2023]
(9 of 9)
negative Final Report has been filed in that FIR. The finding of Revenue Appellate Authority has been affirmed by the Board of Revenue by passing a detailed order dated 24.08.2023 after dealing and recording the contentions of the petitioner.
(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J
45-46-SanjayS/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the land alloted to the private respondent was legally valid and whether the petitioner had sufficient cause for the allotment not being made in his favour.
Whether the revenue authorities committed any error in dismissing the appeal and revision petition filed by the petitioner regarding the land allotment.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Sattar Khan S/o Kadar Baksh
State Of Rajasthan
Board Of Revenue
Revenue Appellate Authority
Sub Divisional Officer, Khajuwala
Abdul Rasid S/o Aashiq Khan
Vinit Kumar Mathur
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
