Arun Bhansali, J.

1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved against the orders dated 12/12/1995 passed by the Revenue Appellate Authority, Sriganganagar and judgment dated 21/7/2000 passed by the Board of Revenue, whereby, the appeal filed by the respondent Smt. Meera has been accepted by the Revenue Appellate Authority and the revision petition filed by the petitioner has been rejected by the Board of Revenue, respectively.

2. The petitioner was allotted land ad measuring 2 Bigha 18 Biswa in Muraba no.237/14 as a small patch by order dated 28/12/1987. The said land comprised in Muraba No.237/14 had already been allotted to Budh Ram s/o Sardara Ram on 30/5/1985. It is claimed that said Budh Ram in fact died in the year 1981 itself.

3. An order dated 2/3/1995 (Annex.3) was passed by the Deputy Collector, Raisinghnagar that in case the land comprised in square no.237/14 is not recorded as forest land or the land is not reserved for special allotment or land has not been allotted to any other person, the legal representatives of Budh Ram may be allowed to deposit the instalments with interest, which amount was deposited by Smt. Meera on 7/3/1995.

4. Where after, Smt. Meera filed an appeal before the Revenue Appellate Authority against the order dated 28/12/1987, whereby, the land was allotted to the petitioner. The Revenue Appellate Authority after hearing the parties came to the conclusion that at the time of allotment the land was already allotted to Budh Ram, before allotment to the petitioner the required procedure was not adopted and as required by Rule 14(1) of the Rajasthan Colonization (Allotment of Sale of Government Land in the Indira Gandhi Canal Colony Area) Rules, 1975 ('the Rules, 1975'), the land of the petitioner was not adjoining to the allotted land and, therefore, the petitioner was not eligible for allotment, the order was passed by the Assistant Collector, Anoopgarh, who as per the provisions of the Rules of 1975 was not the allotting authority and consequently quashed the order of allotment dated 28/12/1987.

5. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner filed revision petition before the Board of Revenue. The Board of Revenue after hearing the parties came to the conclusion that initially the allotment was made to Budh Ram on 30/5/1985 and as per Rule 14 of the Rules of 1975, there is no provision that in case the possession of the land is not taken or the payable amount is not deposited within the stipulated time, the allotment would stand cancelled automatically and further held that in case the conditions of allotment are not complied with, the allotment can be got cancelled but there is no provision for automatic cancellation and, therefore, when the land was allotted to the petitioner, the same was not available for allotment and, therefore, the allotment was liable to be cancelled and consequently dismissed the revision petition.

6. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the Revenue Appellate Authority and the Board of Revenue committed grave error in accepting the appeal/dismissing the revision petition and, therefore, the orders impugned deserve to be quashed and set aside. It was submitted that the allottee Budh Ram had died in the year 1981 and the allotment in his favour was made on 30/5/1985 and as the allotment was made in favour of a dead person, the same was void ab initio and, therefore, the land was open for allotment to the petitioner and was rightly allotted to him in the year 1987.

7. It is further submitted that as the allotment was made in favour of Budh Ram after his death, till the year 1995 the legal representatives of Budh Ram did not take possession of the land in question and also did not pay the amount for allotment and, therefore, in terms of provisions of Section 7 (4) of the Rajasthan Colonization Act, 1954 ('the Act, 1954') neither they could be deemed as tenants nor they had any right or title in the land allotted to the petitioner and, ther