Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
VINIT KUMAR MATHUR, J.
Late Rajmata Krishna Kumari, Wd/o. His Late Highness Maharaj Shri Hanwant Singhji Shaib and Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
State of Rajasthan through the Revenue Secretary, Government of Rajasthan and Ors. – Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1560 Of 2001
Decided On : 10-01-2024
Land Revenue Act - Dispute over possession of land - Rajasthan Land Reforms and Acquisition of Land-Owners Estates Act, 1963 (As amended by Raj. 15 of 1975) - Section 9-A, Section 20
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a tenant, was in cultivatory possession of land since 1961. The Collector issued a notice to deliver possession, which was challenged in court. The Collector later held the petitioner as Khatedar of the land. The State appealed under Section 20 of the Act of 1975, which the petitioner argued was not maintainable.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appeal under Section 20 of the Act of 1975 was not maintainable as the order was passed under Section 9-A of the Act, which was non-appealable. The court also noted that the State could pursue other remedies in accordance with the law.
Issues: Dispute over the maintainability of the State's appeal under Section 20 of the Act of 1975 against the order passed under Section 9-A of the Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the appeal under Section 20 of the Act of 1975 was not maintainable as the order was passed under Section 9-A, which was non-appealable. The court also emphasized that the State could pursue other remedies in accordance with the law.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition, quashed the orders of the Board of Revenue, and held that the appeal under Section 20 of the Act of 1975 against the order passed under Section 9-A of the Act was not maintainable. The State was permitted to avail an appropriate remedy in accordance with the law.
ORDER :
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The present writ petition has been filed against the orders of the Board of Revenue dated 21.08.1997 and 12.03.2001.
Briefly, the facts giving rise to the present writ petition are as under:-
1. That Late Maharaja Shri Hanwant Singh Ji, who was ruler of former State of Jodhpur, entered into a covenant for formation of the State of Rajasthan. Accordingly, under the provisions of said covenant, a list of private properties of former Ruler of Jodhpur State was confirmed by the Govt. of India vide letter of the State Ministry, Government of India dated 24.03.1949. On death of late Maharaja Shri Hanwant Singh Ji on 26.01.1952, Maharaja Gaj Singh Ji succeeded and became the exclusive and absolute owner of all the immovable properties. The President of India recognised Maharaja Gaj Singh as Ruler under the Provisions of Clause (22) of Article 366 of the Constitution of India. Maharaja Gaj Singh Ji gave possession of the land (Barani-unirrigated) having an area of 50 Bighas in Khasra No.632 of Partridge Preserve Area Jodhpur to the petitioner for cultivation as tenant in the year 1961 and the petitioners are in the cultivatory possession of the aforesaid land since then.
2. The Tehsildar, Jodhpur served a notice dated 02.07.1962 under section 91 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 on the petitioner, calling upon her to deliver possession of the land in question alleging that she was a trespasser on the said land. The Tehsildar dropped the proceedings initiated by him under section 91 of the Act of 1956 when he was apprised of the fact that the land in question forms part of Private properties of the former Ruler of State of Jodhpur and that the petitioner was his (former ruler’s) tenant.
3. In the year 1969, Maharaja Shri Gaj Singh Ji, requested the revenue authorities that the land in question which was in the cultivatory possession of the petitioner be mutated in her favour as she had been cultivating the land since 1961. The revenue authorities mutated the land in question in the name of the petitioner on 2.6.1972 vide Mutation No.233 after due inquiry about the cultivatory possession of the petitioner since 1961 and on the basis of the letter dated 30.12.1969 of Maharaja Gaj singh Ji. The revenue authorities also issued pass book to the petitioner recognizing her as Khatedar of the land in question and the petitioner had been paying land revenue to the revenue authorities.
4. The Collector, Jodhpur issued a notice under section 9A of the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Acquisition of Landowners Estate Act, 1963 on 13.11.1975 to the petitioner requiring her to deliver possession of the land in question having an area of 50 Bigha in Khasra No.632 on or before 22.11.1975. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1877/1975 before this Court challenging the aforesaid notice dated 13.11.1975. The writ petition filed by the petitioner was disposed vide order dated 09.01.1985 while giving opportunity to the petitioner to submit her objections before the Collector, Jodhpur in support of her claim of Khatedari rights in respect of the land in question. The Collector, Jodhpur was directed to decide the objections of the petitioner, after affording her reasonable opportunity of producing evidence and after hearing her in the matter before taking over possession of the land in question.
5. The petitioner filed objections to the aforementioned notice of the Collector on 11.03.1985. The Tehsildar, Jodhpur filed reply dated 06.01.1986 on behalf of the State to the aforementioned objections. The petitioner alongwith her application dated 07.10.1985 submitted certain documents and requested the Collector to give some time to produce evidence for proving her case. However, the Collector, Jodhpur by his order dated 10.12.1990 rejected the objections of the petitioner without affording opportunity of producing evidence to him. Aggrieved of the order dated 10.12.1990, the petitioner filed an app
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the appeal under Section 20 of the Act of 1975 was not maintainable as the order was passed under Section 9-A, which was non-appealable. The j....
The court established that khatedari rights under the Rajasthan Tenancy Act cannot be revoked without due process, and that administrative orders lacking legal foundation are void.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the validity of testamentary succession and the importance of adhering to procedural requirements, such as initiating proceedings under Section ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that belated appeals without sufficient cause can be rejected, and the jurisdiction of the Tribunal in exercising revisional power is limited.
Supervisory jurisdiction is limited to ensuring tribunals act within their authority and does not permit re-assessing evidence. Once land is legally acquired and possession taken by the state, subseq....
The court emphasized the importance of proper exercise of revisional jurisdiction and the need for valid mutations in land disputes.
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
