Disposed

Mangilal v. State and Ors.

Rajasthan HC28 Aug 2024CW/1886/2002

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petitions against cancellation of Gram Panchayat pattas issued below market price. Court quashed the cancellation orders subject to petitioners depositing market price of Rs.925 per sq ft with interest; pattas otherwise to stand revoked.

What did the court decide?

Cancellation orders dated 27.03.2002 quashed; pattas maintained subject to deposit of Rs.925/sq ft plus 6% interest within six weeks.

Mangilal Vs State and Ors. — Municipal and Town Planning | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:35594]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2219/2002

¶4

Budhmal	Versus	----Petitioner
State And Ors	Connected Wit	----Respondents h
S.B.	Civil Writ Petition No.	1896/2002
Umadaram	Versus	----Petitioner
State And Ors		----Respondents
S.B.	Civil Writ Petition No.	1908/2002
Laluram	Versus	----Petitioner
State And Ors		----Respondents
S.B.	Civil Writ Petition No.	2218/2002
Ganshyam	Versus	----Petitioner
State And Ors		----Respondents
S.B.	Civil Writ Petition No.	2220/2002
Gopilal
		----Petitioner
	Versus
State And Ors		----Respondents
S.B. Smt.sharda	Civil Writ Petition No.	2221/2002

¶5

[2024:RJ-JD:35594]

¶6

[CW-2219/2002]

¶7

2024:RJ-JD:35594]	(2 of 6)	[CW-2219/2002
State And Ors S.B.	Versus Civil Writ Petition	----Petitioner ----Respondents No. 2223/2002
Pukhraj	Versus	----Petitioner
State And Ors S.B.	Civil Writ Petition	----Respondents No. 2224/2002
Ranidan	Versus	----Petitioner
State And Ors S.B.	Civil Writ Petition	----Respondents No. 2225/2002
Mishrimal	Versus	----Petitioner
State And Ors S.B.	Civil Writ Petition	----Respondents No. 2227/2002
Gumanaram		----Petitioner
	Versus
State And Ors S.B.	Civil Writ Petition	----Respondents No. 2228/2002
Gopi Lal		----Petitioner
	Versus
State And Ors

¶8

(3 of 6) [CW-2219/2002]

[2024:RJ-JD:35594]

----Respondents

and

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1886/2002

Shri Mangilal

----Petitioner

Versus

State Of Raj. and Ors

¶17

----Respondents

¶18

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1897/2002

Kanwar Lal

----Petitioner

Versus

State Of Raj.and Ors

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Pritam Solanki
For Respondent(s)	: Ms. Neelam Sharma, AGC
	Mr. Jitendra Mohan Choudhary

¶24

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

¶25

Order

¶26

28/08/2024

¶27

The present writ petitions have been filed against the orders impugned dated 27.03.2002 passed by the Additional District Collector (Second), Jodhpur in Revision Petition Nos.28/2002, 09/2002, 32/2002, 42/2002, 11/2002, 35/2002 & 17/2002, 07/2002, 44/2002, 05/2002, 45/2002, 47/2002, 21/2002 respectively, preferred by the Additional Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Jodhpur whereby the pattas as issued by the Gram Panchayat in the year 1999 in favour of the petitioners, stood cancelled.

[2024:RJ-JD:35594]

[CW-2219/2002]

(4 of 6)

The learned Additional District Collector (Second), Jodhpur cancelled the pattas on the ground that they were issued in favour of the petitioners without following due process as enshrined in the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules of 1996’). The learned Additional District Collector further observed that the pattas could not have been issued at any price less than the market price as prevalent at that point of time but the Panchayat ignored Rule 156 of the Rules of 1996 which caused a monetary loss to the Gram Panchayat.

¶32

On 18.05.2004, while passing an interim order to maintain status quo regarding the possession of the land in dispute, learned counsel for the respondents was directed by the Court to find out the prevalent market price of the land in question as on the date of issuance of pattas. The interim order dated 18.05.2004 was made absolute on 06.03.2006 till the disposal of the writ petition. Meaning thereby, the petitioners are in possession of the respective lands in question till date.

¶33

On 21.08.2024 when the matters were listed for hearing, last opportunity was granted to learned counsel for the respondent State to complete her instructions regarding the prevalent market price of the lands in question as on the date of issuance of pattas. 5. Today, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent State placed on record a communication dated 27.08.2024 as issued by the Gram Panchayat with an averment that the market price of the plot allotted to Budhmal (petitioner in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2219/2002) was Rs.3,00,000/- at the relevant point of time, that is, Rs.925/- per sq. ft.

[2024:RJ-JD:35594]

[CW-2219/2002]

(5 of 6)

On the query been made to counsel for the respondent State as well as the Gram Panchayat, as to whether the Gram Panchayat is ready to accept the amount equal to the market price at that point of time, both the counsels agreed to the same and on instructions, submitted that if the amount equal to the market price with interest is granted, the Gram Panchayat is ready to accept the same.

¶38

In view of the submissions made and in view of the fact that the pattas in question were cancelled on the ground of the same having been issued at a price less than the market price at that point of time and further, in view of the fact that the petitioners are in possession of the land in question till date, this Court is of the opinion that the equities would be balanced if the pattas as issued to the petitioners are maintained on the condition that they deposit the amount equal to the market price, with interest, with the Gram Panchayat. The Gram Panchayat also having agreed for the same, the order impugned dated 27.03.2002 under challenge in all the writ petitions respectively, is hereby quashed and set aside subject to the petitioners depositing an amount at the rate of Rs.925 per square ft. with interest @ 6% per annum, qua the lands allotted to them vide the pattas in question.

¶39

The amount be deposited within a period of six weeks from today. If the amount is not deposited within the said period, the order dated 27.03.2002 shall stand revived and the pattas issued in favour of the petitioners shall stand cancelled. The Gram Panchayat shall further be at liberty to then proceed in accordance with law to take possession of the lands in question.

¶40

(6 of 6) [CW-2219/2002]

¶41

[2024:RJ-JD:35594]

¶42

With the above observations and directions, the present writ

¶43

petitions stand disposed of .

¶44

All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of .

¶45

(REKHA BORANA),J

¶46

377-387, 412, C-1/KashishS/-

Mangilal v. State and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mangilal v. State and Ors.

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

M/S Riddhi Siddhi Filing Station Vs the State of Rajasthan

Kamaljeet Kaur Vs State of Rajasthan

Mahendra Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

M/S R.K. Transport Company Vs Uttari Rajasthan Sahakari Dugdh Utpadak Sangh Limited

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Comm. Workmens Compensation Udaipur Ando.

Smt. Lichhu Devi Vs Champalal