Disposed

Jaisingh S/O Shyokaran v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC3 Jan 2024CW/28/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged a notice directing removal of their alleged encroachment from land, seeking regularization and citing prior court orders. Holding that an alternative statutory remedy under the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act was available and had to be availed first, the Court disposed of the petition relegating petitioners to the Appellate Authority with directions for expedited hearing.

What the court decided

AI extract

Jaisingh S/O Shyokaran Vs the State of Rajasthan — Property and Title | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:358]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 28/2024

¶4

Jaisingh S/o Shyokaran, Aged About 64 Years, R/o Village Farat, Tehsil Surajgarh, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.)

¶5

Surat Singh S/o Daluram, Aged About 60 Years, R/o Village Farat, Tehsil Surajgarh, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.)

¶6

----Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary, Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶9

The Additional District Majistrate, Jhunjhunu Office Adm, Pro Office Campus, Jhunjhunu (Raj.)

¶10

The Tehsildar, Tehsil Surajgarh, District Jhunjhunu Rajasthan.

¶11

The Land Record Inspector, Bhawathari, Tehsil Surajgarh, District Jhunjhunu Rajasthan.

¶12

----Respondents

¶13

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Raja Ram Choudhary For Respondent(s) :

¶14

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

¶15

Order

¶16

03/01/2024

¶17

The instant petition has been filed by the petitioners with the following prayer:-

¶18

“1. By issuing an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof and thereby quash and set aside the impugned notice dated 06.12.2023 (Annexure-4) issued by the respondent No. 4 and the respondents be directed to reqularize the land in accordance with the directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Curt and taking into

(2 of 3)

[2024:RJ-JP:358]

[CW-28/2024]

consideration long possession of the petitioners with all basic amenities provided by the State Government. 2. Any other appropriate relief which this Hon’ble Court deems just and proper may also be awarded in favour of the petitioners including the cost.

¶23

By way of filing this petition, the petitioners have assailed the notice dated 06.12.2023 issued by the Land Record Inspector by which a direction has been issued to him to remove his encroachment from the land in question.

¶24

Counsel for the petitioners submits that pursuant to the order dated 14.11.2022 passed by this Court while deciding SBCWP No. 16132/2022 the above proceedings were initiated by the respondents under Section 91 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 (for short, ‘the Act of 1956’). Counsel submits that the order dated 14.11.2022 was passed ex parte without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. Counsel submits that though the petitioner has alternative statutory remedy of filing appeal against the impugned order dated 06.12.2023 but the respondents are not granting him enough time to avail the said remedy and they are bent upon to demolish the constructions of the petitioner.

¶25

In the considered opinion of this Court, the petitioners have alternative statutory remedy under the provisions contained under the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 but without availing the said remedy, the petitioners have straightaway approached this Court by way of filing this petition.

¶26

It is a well settled proposition of law that whenever an alternative statutory remedy is available to a person, he cannot be allowed to bypass the jurisdiction of the said authority.

[2024:RJ-JP:358]

[CW-28/2024]

(3 of 3)

Keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, the instant petition stands disposed of relegating the petitioner to avail statutory remedy before the Appellate Authority as per the provisions contained under the Act of 1956. In case, any appeal is submitted before the Appellate Authority within a period of four weeks from today, the Appellate Authority is expected to hear and decide the same expeditiously, strictly in accordance with law, after providing the opportunity of hearing to the respective parties, ignoring the period of limitation.

¶31

Till filing of the appeal, parties are directed to maintain the status quo.

¶32

The appellate Authority is directed to decide the stay application on its merits without being influenced by any observation made by this Court.

¶33

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

¶34

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

¶35

Ashu/277

Jaisingh S/O Shyokaran v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Jaisingh S/O Shyokaran v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Mamta Vs Gram Panchayat Bamor

Bimla Devi Meena Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Commissioner, Municipal Council Vs Mahendra Singh Deval S/O Late Jeevan Singh

Ugrasain Vs B.O.R.and Ors.

Smt Rashmi Jain Andanr Vs B O R Ajmer and Ors.

M/S Johnson and Johnson Private Limited Vs State of Rajasthan