Allowed

Kedarnath Diwan S/O Shri Jagannath Diwan v. Raghuveer S/O Choonaram Yadav

Rajasthan HC8 Jan 2024CW/19994/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A PIL where the petitioner challenged orders in a land revenue dispute before the Sub Divisional Officer and Additional Divisional Commissioner. The Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the Board of Revenue to decide the pending appeal and stay application within four months.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of with direction to the Board of Revenue to decide the pending appeal and stay application expeditiously, preferably within four months of receipt of certified copy of this order.

Kedarnath Diwan S/O Shri Jagannath Diwan Vs Raghuveer S/O… — Land Acquisition | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:923]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19994/2023

¶4

Kedarnath Diwan S/o Shri Jagannath Diwan, aged about 67 Years, R/o Diwan Ji Ki Haweli, Main Bazar Patan, Tehsil Patan (Earlier Tehsil Neemkathana) District Sikar.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

Raghuveer S/o Choonaram Yadav, R/o Patan, Tehsil Neemkathana, District Sikar.

¶8

Chokharam S/o Choonaram Yadav, R/o Patan, Tehsil Neemkathana, District Sikar.

¶9

Ganpat S/o Choonaram Yadav, R/o Patan, Tehsil Neemkathana, District Sikar.

¶10

Landholder Through Tehsildar, Neemkathana, TehsilNeemkathana, District -Sikar.

¶11

----Respondents

¶12

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shashi Shekhar Gaur, Adv.

¶13

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

¶14

Order

¶15

08/01/2024

¶16

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the application filed by the petitioner under Section 128 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 (for short ‘the Act of 1956’) was allowed by the Sub Divisional Officer, Neem Ka Thana (Sikar) vide order dated 10.10.2022 by which a direction was issued to the authorities for demarcation of the land in question. Counsel submits that aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the respondents preferred an appeal under Section 75 of the Act of 1956 before the Additional Divisional Commissioner, however, the same was also rejected vide order dated 31.07.2023. Counsel submits that aggrieved by

(2 of 2)

[2024:RJ-JP:923]

[CW-19994/2023]

the both orders, the respondents have submitted an appeal under Section 76 of the Act of 1956 before the Board of Revenue, Ajmer (for short ‘the Board’) alongwith an application for stay wherein a status quo order has been passed by the Board vide impugned order dated 23.08.2023. Counsel submits that the matter is subjudice before the Board and a very limited controversy is involved there in the matter, so the Board be directed to decide the pending appeal and the stay application expeditiously within a fixed time frame.

¶21

Looking to the short controversy involved in this matter, the instant writ petition stands disposed of with direction to the Board to decide the pending appeal filed by the respondents expeditiously strictly in accordance with law, preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶22

All pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

¶23

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

¶24

MR/41

Kedarnath Diwan S/O Shri Jagannath Diwan v. Raghuveer S/O Choonaram Yadav

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kedarnath Diwan S/O Shri Jagannath Diwan v. Raghuveer S/O Choonaram Yadav

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

Urban Development and Housing Department (Udh) Vs Rohan Rajdeep Rajasthan Infra Projects Limited

Ritesh Soni S/O Kailash Chand Vs the Registrar, Rajashthan Paramedical Council

Lad Devi W/O Sh. Ramkishore Vs Iqbal

M/S Parmar Builders Vs State of Rajasthan

Tribhuwhan Narayan Sharma S/O Shri Bansi Dhar Sharma Vs Urban Development and Housing Department

Rajesh Kumar S/O Puran Singh Vs District Collector