Back
NUPUR BHATI
Madan Lal – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the following prayers:-
2. The facts appertain are that the respondent No.4 – Dheer Singh filed an application (Annex.1) before the Gram Panchayat, Chohtan for allotment of patta under the category of weaker section as landless persons. The respondent No.3, Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Chohtan, after preparing the mauka report and complying the procedure, resolved to allot patta in favour of respondent No.4 under Rule 158 of the Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996 (for short, ‘the Rules of 1996’) vide Resolution No.1(5) dated 20.08.2009 (Annex.3) and issued patta No.2633 (Annex.4) on 10.12.2009.
3. Aggrieved against the issuance of patta (Annex.4), the petitioner preferred a revision petition for cancellation of the same before the respondent No.2 – District Collector, Barmer, which came to be dismissed vide order dated 08.02.2016 (Annex.7).
4. Being dissatisfied with the order dated 08.02.2016 (Annex.7), the petitioner has preferred the present writ
Locus standi and substantiation of challenges are crucial in writ petitions, and failure to provide evidence can lead to dismissal.
The court emphasized the importance of adherence to the provisions of Rule 157 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules 1996 and the unjustified delay in initiating action against the petitioners.
The cancellation of 'pattas' should be in accordance with Rule 266, and the decision should be reasoned and speaking.
The order of the revisional authority must contain reasons for deciding the revision petition and address the contentions raised by the petitioner.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
