1. This writ petition is directed against order dated 19.11.14 of the District Collector, Bhilwara, whereby the revision petition preferred by the respondent no. 2 herein, assailing the validity of patta of the disputed land, issued by the Gram Panchayat, Arazia in favour of the petitioner has been allowed and consequently, the patta issued in favour of the petitioner, stands cancelled.

2. Precisely, the facts of the case are that the petitioner made an application to the Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Arazia for issuing the patta of the land alleged to be in his possession, used as 'bara' for tying the cattle and storing the cattle food. It is averred that after following the procedure laid down, the Gram Panchayat its meeting held on 4.11.96 resolved to issue patta of the land in question in favour of the petitioner, who deposited the cost of the land a sum of Rs.1302/-on 31.3.97 and accordingly, patta was issued in his favour. It appears that in the meeting of the Gram Panchayat held on 20.1.14, a resolution was adopted to renew the patta issued in favour of the petitioner and get it registered.

3. At this stage, after a lapse of about 17 years, the respondent preferred a revision petition under Section 97 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, questioning the legality of the patta of the plot in question issued in favour of the petitioner, without following the procedure laid down and realising the market value thereof.

4. The revisional authority arrived at the finding that the patta issued in favour of the petitioner at the meagre price of 20 paise per sq. feet, de hors the provisions of Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996 (for short “the Rules of 1996”) is not sustainable in the eyes of law. Accordingly, the patta issued has been cancelled.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the decision to issue patta in favour of the petitioner was taken by the Gram Panchayat in its meeting held on 4.11.96, after following the procedure laid down under the Rajasthan Panchayat (General) Rules, 1961. Learned counsel submitted that the patta was issued in favour of the petitioner in the year 1997 but the proceedings for issuing the patta was concluded by the Panchayat by adopting resolution dated 4.11.96 and therefore, the revisional authority has seriously erred in holding the patta issued in favour of the petitioner as illegal, while relying upon the provisions of the Rules of 1996, which have come into force w.e.f. 30.12.96. Learned counsel submitted that the legality of the patta issued in favour of the petitioner was required to be examined taking into consideration the rules in force at the relevant time. Learned counsel submitted that the revisional authority has seriously erred in entertaining the challenge to the patta after a lapse of 17 years.

6. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel and perused the material on record.

7. Indisputably, as on the date the petitioner submitted the application to the Gram Panchayat and till the date the resolution was adopted by the Gram Panchayat, for issuing patta of the land in question in favour of the petitioner, the Rules of 1996 had not come into force and therefore, the transfer of the lands of the Gram Panchayat at the relevant time was governed by the Rules of 1961.

8. It is not the case of the petitioner that he has purchased the plot in question by way of auction rather, he claimed patta thereof on the strength of possession over the same and accordingly, the land has been sold by Gram Panchayat in his favour by way of private negotiation.

9. At the relevant time, under the Rules of 1961, the transfer of the land by private negotiation was governed by the provisions of Rule 266 of the Rules, which may be beneficially quoted:

“Rule 266. Transfer of abadi land by private negotiation.-(1) The Panchayat may transfer any abadi land by way of sale by private negotiation in the following cases:-

(a) Where any person has a plausible claim