Badan Singh and Ors. Vs the District Collector and Ors.

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:24743]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 20223/2017

¶4

Badan Singh Son of Shri Ramswroop, aged about 65 years, Resident of Village Kharli Ganasiya Police Station Bayana, Tehsil Bayana, District Bharatpur Rajasthan

¶5

Karan Singh Son of Shri Tej Singh, aged about 56 years, Resident of Village Kharli Ganasiya Police Station Bayana, Tehsil Bayana, District Bharatpur Rajasthan

¶6

Ram Bharoshi Son of Shri Ramhet, aged about 70 years, Resident of Village Kharli Ganasiya Police Station Bayana, Tehsil Bayana, District Bharatpur Rajasthan

¶7

Babu Singh Son of Shri Baljeet Singh, aged about 50 years, Resident of Village Kharli Ganasiya Police Station Bayana, Tehsil Bayana, District Bharatpur Rajasthan

¶8

Niranjan Singh Son of Shri Hari Singh, aged about 50 years, Resident of Village- Khedli Gadasiya Tehsil Bayana, District Bharatpur At Present Ward Panch, Ward No. 1, Gram Panchayat, Khedli, Gadasiya District Bharatpur Rajasthan

¶9

Smt. Saroj Wife of Shri Lokesh, aged about 26 years, Resident of Gram Khedli Gadasiya, Tehsil Bayana, District Bharatpur At Present Ward No.7, Deputy Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Khedli, Gasasiya District Bharatpur Rajasthan

¶10

Smt. Naval Devi Wife of Shri Roop Singh, aged about 46 years, Resident of Khedli Ward Panch Ward No. 2

¶11

----Petitioners

¶12

Versus

¶13

The District Collector, Bharatpur.

¶14

The Additional District Magistrate, Bharatpur.

¶15

The Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Bayana, Tehsil Bayana, District Bharatpur.

¶16

The Tehsildar, Bayana, District Bharatpur.

¶17

The Chief Medical And Health Officer, Bharatpur Rajasthan

¶18

The Block Medical Officer, Bayana, District Bharatpur. 7. Secretary, Gram Panchayat Khedli Gadasiya Panchayat Samiti Bayana, District Bharatpur Rajasthan

¶19

Amit Kumar Present Elected Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat

(2 of 6)

[2025:RJ-JP:24743]

[CW-20223/2017]

Khedli Gadasiya, Tehsil Bayana, Panchayat Samiti Bayana, District Bharatpur Rajasthan

¶24

M/s Rajkumar Garg, Contractor, Pai Bag, Bharatpur (Raj.) (A Partnership Firm) through Its Partner Rajkumar Garg S/o Late Shri Radhey Shyam Garg, Aged 59 years, R/o Pai Bag, Bharatpur (Raj.)

¶25

----Respondents

¶26

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Saransh Saini
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Archit Bohra-AGC with Mr. Prakhar Jain
	Mr. Yash Joshi
	Mr. J.P. Gupta
	Mr. Shantanu Gupta for Mr. Bipin Gupta

¶27

JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

¶28

Order

¶29

04/07/2025

¶30

By way of filing this writ petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned letter dated 03.10.2017 issued by the Tehsildar, Bayana (Bharatpur) by which he has made a recommendation for construction of Community Health Center (for short, ‘CHC’) at the land bearing Khasra Nos. 1/1148, 1/1149, 1/1150 and 1/1151 situated at Village Hingota, Patwar Mandal Khedli Gadasiya, Tehsil Bayana, District Bharatpur.

¶31

Counsel for the petitioners submits that a decision was taken by the District Collector, Bharatpur (for short, ‘the Collector’) for construction of CHC at the land bearing Khasra No. 1760/1 situated at Village Khedli Gadasiya, Tehsil Bayana District Bharatpur, in exercising of the power contained under the Rajasthan Land Revenue (Allotment of Unoccupied Government Agricultural Lands for Construction of Schools, Colleges,

[2025:RJ-JP:24743]

[CW-20223/2017]

(3 of 6)

Dispensaries, Dharamshalas and other building of Public Utility), Rules 1963 (for short, ‘the Rules of 1963’). Counsel submits that after passing of the aforesaid order, the construction activities were started and almost half of the construction was completed but in the meantime, the Tehsildar, Bayana passed the impugned order dated 03.10.2017 for construction of the aforesaid CHC at some other land situated at Village Hingota, Patwar Mandal Kherli Gadasiya, Tehsil Bayana, District Bharatpur. Counsel submits that since the allotment, as per the procedure followed under the Rules of 1963, was made in favour of the petitioners and half of the construction was completed and mutation was also open, then there was no reason or occasion available with the Tehsildar to pass the aforesaid order impugned, hence interference of this Court is warranted.

¶36

Per contra, counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No. 8 opposed the prayer and submitted that the Tehsildar has not committed any error in passing the impugned order dated 03.10.2017, as the land bearing Khasra Nos. 1/1148, 1/1149, 1/1150 and 1/1151 situated at Village Hingota, Gram Panchayat Khedli Gadasiya, Tehsil Bayana, District Bharatpur was found to be more suitable for the purpose of construction of aforesaid CHC in the interest of villagers.

¶37

Counsel appearing for the State-respondent submitted that after following the procedure contained under Rules 1963 and looking to the interest of the public at large, a decision was taken by the District Collector, Bharatpur for construction of CHC at the land bearing Khasra No. 1760/1 and accordingly, the said land was set apart for the aforesaid purpose from Pasture land to

[2025:RJ-JP:24743]

[CW-20223/2017]

(4 of 6)

institutional purpose i.e. CHC. A conscious decision was taken on 29.06.2016 and tenders were invited for the construction activities of CHC and pursuant thereto construction of residential quarters of the staff commenced and almost half of the construction work is completed. Counsel submits that in the meantime, Tehsildar, unnecessarily giving reference of some earlier order, misled the Collector and that is why the entire confusion has been created. Counsel submits that now during pendency of this petition, a Committee comprising of the District Collector, Bharatpur; the Sub Divisional Officer, Bayan; the Chief Medical and Health Officer, Bharatpur; the Tehsildar Bayana; and the Block Chief Medical Officer was constituted, who examined each and every aspect of the matter and has made recommendation for completion of the work of CHC and the staff quarters on the very same land ie. land bearing Khasra No. 1760/1 situated at Village Khedli Gadasiya, Tehsil Bayana, District Bharatpur. Counsel submits that a conscious decision has been taken in the interest of public at large and a report was prepared in this regard on 26.06.2025. Counsel submits that under these circumstances, appropriate orders be passed.

¶42

Counsel for the intervenor i,.e. M/s Raj Kumar GargContractor submits that a contract of construction of CHC and residential quarters was allotted to him on 29.11.2017 and thereafter almost half of the construction work has been completed, but because of the interim order passed by this Court, the rest of the construction work could not be completed. Counsel submits that appropriate orders be issued to the authorities concerned for payment of the construction work done by him.

[2025:RJ-JP:24743]

[CW-20223/2017]

(5 of 6)

Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on record.

¶47

Perusal of the record as well as the order dated 29.03.2016 indicate that the District Collector, Bharatpur had already passed an order in exercise of the powers contained under Rules, 1963 for allotment of land bearing Khasra No. 1760/1 situated at Village Khedli Gadasiya, Tehsil Bayana, District Bharatpur, for the purpose of construction of the CHC and the residential quarters of the staff. It appears that subsequently, some report was submitted by the Tehsildar, Bayana to the District Collector, Bharatpur for altering the aforesaid decision and for construction of the aforesaid CHC at other land bearing Khasra Nos. 1/1148, 1/1149, 1/1150 and 1/1151 situated at Village Hingota, Patwar Mandal, Khedli Gadasiya, Tehsil Bayana, District Bharatpur. It appears that the correct facts were not brought into the knowledge of the Collector and construction activities were stopped/halted.

¶48

Aggrieved by the aforesaid order/letter, issued by the Tehsildar, the petitioners have approached this Court and during the pendency of this writ petition, a Committee was constituted by the State Government, comprising of the District Collector, Bharatpur; the Sub Divisional Officer, Bayana; the Chief Medical and Health Officer, Bharatpur; the Tehsildar Bayana and the Block Chief Medical Officer, which examined the entire factual aspect of the matter, at ground level and found that the decision to raise construction of CHC and the staff quarters at the land bearing Khasra No. 1760/1 was not erroneous and half of the construction activities have already been completed, therefore a recommendation has been made by the Committee Members to

(6 of 6)

[2025:RJ-JP:24743]

[CW-20223/2017]

the District Collector to complete the rest of the construction work.

¶53

Considering the factual report, prepared by the aforesaid Committee Members, this Court deems it just and proper to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 03.10.2017 passed by the Tehisldar and the respondents are at liberty to proceed with the construction activities, pursuant to the order dated 29.03.2016 as well as the Committee’s decision dated 26.06.2025.

¶54

The State respondent is further directed to settle the claim of the contractor for payment of construction activities done by him, after analyzing the physical work on the site in question and for that purpose the contractor may submit a representation.

¶55

The present writ petition stands allowed, accordingly.

¶56

Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

¶57

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

¶58

Ashu/1

Badan Singh and Ors. v. the District Collector and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Badan Singh and Ors. v. the District Collector and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Khandelwal Traders Vs Rajasthan State Industrial Development and Investment Corporation Ltd. (Riico)

M/S H.G. Infra Engineering Limited, Vs Chief Regional Manager, New India Assurance Company Limited

Dadhich Finserv Private Limited Vs Sukhvinder Kaur W/O Trilok Singh

M/S Shyam Minerals Vs State of Rajasthan

Manish Pathak Son of Shri Raj Narayan Pathak Vs State of Rajasthan

Baba Laxmandas Chela Baba Mohandas Vs Babulal S/O Shri Narayanlal Saini