1. All the above-mentioned writ petitions shall stand decided by a common order as the issue involved is identical. For convenience, the facts are being taken from S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8148/2012.

2. The prayer in the present writ petition is to set aside the order dated 20.06.2012 passed by the District Collector, Barmer vide which he has cancelled the Patta issued in favour of the petitioners. Patta was issued to the petitioner on 20.12.2008 (Annex.1) by the Gram Panchayat for the land measuring 1500 sq. feet under the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996. The respondent No.3 filed a complaint/revision petition before the District Collector, Barmer for cancellation of Patta issued in favour of the petitioner on 20.10.2010 alleging that the Patta was issued to the petitioner in a fraudulent manner and in violation of the provisions laid down under the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 and Rules of 1996. Notices were issued to the petitioner and Gram Panchayat on 22.10.2010. The Gram Panchayat did not appear despite service. However, the District Collector after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, cancelled the Patta vide impugned order dated 20.06.2012.

3. While praying for setting aside the impugned order, learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the respondent No.3 has since died and the Gram Panchayat never contested the revision petition and nor filed their reply. No record was produced before the Collector and the Collector arbitrary cancelled the Patta in the absence of the record. The respondent No.2 had himself issued the Patta, hence his statement before the Collector is false on the face of it and thus, the petitioner cannot be punished on account of the non-availability of the record. The Patta was issued under the signatures and seal of the Sarpanch as well as Gram Sewak cum Secretary and therefore, there was no cause or reason to deny the same or not produce the record. At least, the Panchayat Resolution register should have been called and examined by the respondent No.1 for proper adjudication of the case.

4. Reply has been filed by respondent No.1. Reply has also been filed by respondent Nos.2 and 3 in CWP No.8147/2012.

5. Learned counsel for the parties were heard at length.

6. No doubt, the respondent No.3 has since died but the same has no bearing on the matter to be decided on merits, inasmuch as, a revision is maintainable as the authority has the power of revision and review even on its own motion with respect to any proceedings to satisfy itself as to the correctness, legality or propriety of any decision or order passed therein.

7. A perusal of the order passed by the District Collector shows that the Gram Sewak cum Secretary vide his letter dated 17.1.2011 informed the respondent No.1 that the record with respect to the allotment of Patta to the petitioner was not available with the Gram Panchayat Gudamalani. On an application moved by the counsel for the petitioner, the Gram Sewak cum Secretary was summoned, who too appeared and informed that the said record was not available. Thereafter, even the Development Officer of the Panchayat Samiti was directed to produce the record who vide his letter No.567 dated 28.5.2012 informed that no such Patta was available on record. Thus, the grant of Patta @ Rs.200/- was found to have been allotted fraudulently. Even if, the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner that he cannot be punished for the non-availability of the record is accepted, still the very allotment is in violation of Rule 157 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996. Rule 157 of the Rules reads as under:-

“Rule 157. Regularisation of old houses.- (1) Where the persons are in possession of the old house in Abadi land and desire to get a Patta issued patta may be issued by the Panchayat (in Form XIIIA) after depositing charges as under:-

(a) For old houses constructed more than fifty years ago Rs.100/-

(b) For old houses constructed during last fifty years