JUDGMENT :

1. The matter has been listed in the category of ‘orders’. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally.

2. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India with the following prayer:-

“1. The judgment and decree dt.8-11-2006 passed by the Revenue Appellate Authority, Udaipur (Annex.6), as also, the judgment dt.12-9-2008 passed by the learned Board of Revenue (Annex.8) may very kindly be quashed and set aside with all their natural consequences;

2. The judgment and decree dt.8-6-2006 (Annex.4) passed by the learned Sub Divisional Officer, Girwa may very kindly be upheld and maintained with all its natural consequences; and

3. Any other relief/reliefs which this Hon’ble Court may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be granted in favour of the petitioner.”

3. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent Shri Bhagwanlal and others filed a suit under Section 88 and 188 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 (hereinafter the Act of 1955) before the Sub Divisional Officer, Girwa, District Udaipur for correction in revenue entries and for entering their names in the revenue record as Khatedars of the land in question while submitting that the respondents were having the Khatedari rights of the land situated in Khasra No.315 admeasuring 0.5700 hectors, land situated at Khasra No.316 admeasuring 0.1000 hectors, land situated at Khasra No.318 admeasuring 0.4000 hectors and land situated at Khasra No.319 admeasuring 0.0200 hectors in Village Shobhagpura, Tehsil Girwa, District Udaipur. The petitioner-defendant and defendant No.2 filed written statement in the suit and denied the averments made therein. The SDO, Girwa District Udaipur framed four issues for adjudication of the suit filed before it. The SDO Girwa, District Udaipur dismissed the suit filed by the plaintiff-respondents vide judgment and decree dated 08.06.2006 (Annexure-4). The plaintiff respondents being aggrieved of the judgment and decree dated 08.06.2006 filed an appeal before the Revenue Appellate Authority, Udaipur and vide judgment dated 08.11.2006 (Annexure-6), the Revenue Appellate Authority, Udaipur allowed the appeal filed by the plaintiff-respondents. The petitioner being aggrieved of the judgment and decree dated 08.11.2006 (Annexure-6) preferred an appeal before the Board of Revenue, Ajmer under Section 224 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act and the Board of Revenue, Ajmer vide order dated 12.09.2008 (Annexure-8) dismissed the appeal preferred by the petitioner. The petitioner being aggrieved of the same, has preferred the present writ petition.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Revenue Appellate Authority, Udaipur and Board of Revenue, Ajmer failed to appreciate the fact that the acquisition of Khatedari right in favour of the plaintiff-respondents with respect to land which is recorded in the name of “Raghunath Dwara” is in violation of mandatory provision of Section 16 and 46 of the Act of 1955 and the entry of Khatedari rights as directed in the name of plaintiff-respondents is misreading and non-reading of material available on record. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that upon perusal of Annexure-1 i.e. copies of Jamabandies it is reflected that the State of Mewar in the Samvat 1987 had recorded the rights in the name of “Shri Charbhuja Ji Sthan Deh” as Khatedar of the land in question and Shri Nanudas S/o Shri Lichmanram was recorded as ‘Pujari’ of the land in question. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that Section 46 of the Act of 1955 provides exemption in case of a minor in exceptional cases and a person incapable of cultivating his holding by reason of physical disability or infirmity. He also submitted that idol/deity falls to both the classes i.e. a minor as well as the physical disabled or infirm person and the manager or the State is under an obligation to protect the inter