Active association in the proceedings can justify impleadment as a necessary party.

1. - This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners challenging the order dated 21.10.2014 passed by the Board of Revenue whereby the application filed by the respondent Shala Sampada Sanrakshan Samiti under Order 1, Rule 10 CPC was allowed and the said Samiti was allowed to be impleaded as party. It is contended that the petitioners had filed revision petition against the order of Tehsildar for eviction under Section 91 of the Land Revenue Act. The aforesaid Shala Sampada Sanrakshan Samiti was not a party in the proceedings before the Tehsildar, therefore, it cannot be permitted to be impleaded as party in the revision petition filed by the petitioners. The scope of revision petition is restricted. Learned counsel in support of arguments has relied on the judgement of this Court in Hardeva v. Ismail & Ors., AIR 1970 Rajasthan 167 (FB) and Nijamuddin v. State of Raj. & Ors.-1994 (2) RLR 132 and argued that Shala Sampada Sanrakshan Samiti, which is neither registered, nor otherwise recognised, cannot be considered as a proper and necessary party. The learned Revenue Board has also not given any reasoning in the impugned order except saying that for the facts stated in the application, Shala Sampada Sanrakshan Samiti is impleaded as necessary party and application was accordingly allowed.

2. Perusal of the application filed by Shala Sampada Sanrakshan Samiti before the Board of Revenue indicates that the land in dispute situated in khasra no.546/1 admeasuring 9 bigha and 16 biswas was allotted to the Government Senior Secondary School Karkedi for play ground in the year 1966 and when certain persons made encroachment upon this land, the representatives of the said Samiti filed application for measurement of the land before the SDO/Tehsildar, Rupangarh. It was on that basis that the SDO/Tehsildar, Rupangarh found the encroachment and negotiations took place between the representatives of the Samiti and the petitioners, but that time the petitioners refused to remove the encroachment stating that they have patta of the land issued to them by Gram Panchayat. It was thereafter that the SDO/Tehsildar, Rupangarh on 6.8.2014 had made exact measurement of the land and got the pattas of Panchayat Samiti, Kishangarh verified. The averments in the application clearly indicates that the representatives of the said Samiti were actively associated with the initiation of proceeding against the petitioners and, therefore, their impleadment cannot be said to be without any justification.

3. This Court, therefore, does not deem it fit to entertain the writ petition.

4. The writ petition is dismissed. The stay application also stands disposed of.Petition Dismissed.

*******