ORDER :

1. These writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners assailing the validity of the orders passed by Additional District Judge, Rajsamand (‘Trial Court’), whereby the learned Trial Court has rejected the applications preferred by the petitioners under Order 41 Rule 27 (1) and Order 11 Rule 12 read with Section 151 CPC. Since, the controversy involved in this batch of writ petition is common, these writ petitions are being decided by this common order, however, facts of SBCWP No. 2687/2024 are taken into consideration illustratively.

2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the respondent Temple Board, Nathdwara preferred an application seeking eviction of the petitioner No. 1/tenant from the suit shop No. 4 in question situation in an inn ¼/keZ’kkyk½ under the provisions of Rajasthan Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1964 (‘Act of 1964’). In the application, it was inter-alia alleged that the inn ¼/keZ’kkyk½ was in the ownership of the Temple Board and non-applicant No. 1/petitioner No. 1 was the tenant and the non-application No. 2/petitioner No. 2, Seth Jamnadas Lallubhai Charitable Trust, Mumbai (‘Trust’) was authorized agent to collec