JUDGMENT :

PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI, J.

1. In wake of instant surge in COVID-19 cases and spread of its highly infectious Omicron variant, abundant caution is being maintained, while hearing the matters in the Court, for the safety of all concerned.

2. The petitioner has preferred the present petition claiming the following relief:

“1. Allow this writ petition.

2. Direct the respondents for making corrections in the revenue entries in relation to Khasras No. 1673 and 1270 pertaining to Samwat Year 2061 situated in Revenue Village Raipur, District Pali.”

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that at the time of resumption of Jagir land, the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Resumption of Jagirs Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act of 1952’) was in operation and accordingly, the land record was prepared. The petitioner's family being a Jagirdar sought possession of certain private properties under Section 23 of the Act of 1952 and after due adjudication, the Jagir Commissioner finalized the list of properties of the petitioner's family and such properties were demarcated as private properties.

4. The bone of contention in the present litigation is the property listed at Serial No. 8 i.e. temple of Narsingh Ji including two wells and a Bavdi and land pertaining to said temple with a chowk and trees, is situated in Khasra No. 1673 and the other property listed at Serial No. 11 i.e. the temple of Karni Mata Ji alongwith Dharamshala, chowk and wells and trees, which is situated in Khasra No. 1270. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, the grandson and legal heir of the original Jagirdar, and his family were enjoying the peaceful possession of the aforesaid two properties, but when they sought to make a construction on the said properties in the year 2010, they was restrained from the same on the count that the properties belonged to the State.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has shown the certified copy of the land record, which is Annexure-2 of the present petition, in which, both the properties situated at Khasra No. 1673 and Khasra No. 1270 are reflected to be the properties of the petitioner's family including both the temples. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further demonstrated from the record that the position of Jagir Commissioner's demarcation was never challenged by the State and thus, attained finality.

6. Learned counsel for the respondent State, however, submits that though both the properties have been declared by Jagir Commissioner as private properties of the petitioner's family, at the time of verification of the properties in question, the concerned officer of the State had only verified the property regarding the temple of Karni Mata Ji as private property, and had not verified the property regarding the temple of Narsingh Ji. The record depicting the same has been produced.

7. Learned counsel for the respondent further submits that the verification process was critical to the determination of properties as either publicly owned or privately owned, and that the necessary determination of the list of properties so owned, was made by the Jagir Commissioner and sent to the Tehsildar, Raipur whereby it was found that the properties in question i.e. the temple of Narsinghji and its appurtenant has not been verified as private property, but as public property, and that the concerned Tehsildar has filed his comments for the same as well, and that the entire procedure was conducted in accordance with law.

8. Learned counsel for the respondent also fairly submits that no challenge is made to the determination made by the Jagir Commissioner.

9. Learned counsel for the respondent further submits that the temples in question are public properties/places and therefore, declaring them to be of a private ownership at this stage shall be depriving not only the public at large from the temples in-question, but also shall be infringed the rights connected with the faith of the people that reside