The court established that misclassification of land does not negate the authority of the District Collector to allot land for public development under the Rajasthan Tenancy Act.

JUDGMENT

Sandeep Mehta, J. - This writ petition in the nature of PIL has been preferred by the petitioner for assailing the order dated 29.10.2020 passed by the District Collector, Barmer whereby, the land admeasuring 49 Bighas 5 Biswas from Khasra No.3241/1650 Mauja Barmer has been set apart/allotted/transferred to the Municipal Council, Barmer for Aabadi development.

2. While entertaining the writ petition, this Court passed an ex- parte ad interim stay order dated 08.02.2021 staying the effect and opration of the order dated 29.10.2020.

The foundation of the petitioner's challenge to the impugned order is that the land in question is reserved as pasture land and thus, the District Collector, Barmer had no authority under the Rajasthan Tenancy Act so as to set apart the same for Aabadi development. It is further stated that Section 7 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act does empower the District Collector to set apart Gochar land for the purposes mentioned in the Section but, in such a situation, the District Collector has to set apart an equal area of land to compensate the deficiency caused in the Gochar area. The petitioner has referred to certified copies of the Jamabandis and on the strength thereof, it is submitted that as there is a categoric entry in the revenue records that the land in question is hilly area reserved for grazing purposes and on the strength theeof, it is alleged that the District Collector acted well beyond jurisdiction while setting apart the land in question for Aabadi expansion and that too without offsetting the loss caused to the Gochar land.

3. Reply on behalf of the State Government's revenue department has been filed wherein, the case set up by the petitioner regarding the land in question being of pasture category has been refuted. Copy of the Jamabandi for the Samvat 20122039 has been annexed with the reply as Annexure-R/1 wherein, the entire Khasra No.1650 admeasuring 260 Bighas is classified as 'Gair Mumkin Bhakar'.

At para No.13 of the reply filed by respondent No.3 Municipal Council, Barmer, it has been asserted that the disputed Khasra No.3241 is a part of the original Khasra No.1650 which was entered as 'Gair Mumkin Bhakhar' (a hillock) in the revenue record at the time of settlement. Assertions made in para No.3 of the reply are reiterated herein below for the sake of ready reference:

"3. That even otherwise, the petitioner did not approach with clean hands to this Hon'ble Court and he has concealed material facts from this Hon'ble Court. In this respect, it is respectfully submitted that basic grievance of the petitioner is that nature of land of Khasra No.-3241/1650 is pasture land and such land cannot be set-apart for any other purposes; however, there is having no substance in such plea of the petitioner. Land in question i.e. Khasra No.-3241/1650 was earlier part of Khasra No.-1650 and Khasra No.-1650 is recorded as germumkin bhakhar in the revenue record. At the time of settlement, nature of Khasra No.-1650 was recorded as germumkin bhakhar in the revenue record, however later on at the time of preparation of computerized jamabandi of Samvat 2057-2060, inadvertently nature of Khasra No.-1650 mentioned as Pahadi & Parvat (charagah hetu). However, facts remain that nature of land of Khasra No.-1650 is germumkin bhakhar and only due to inadvertent mistake, word 'for pasture usage' mentioned in the jamabandi. Merely on the basis of inadvertently entering some wrong entry in respect of nature of land, the petitioner cannot be permitted to take advantage. Answering respondent vide letter dated 06.09.2022 has sought factual report of Khasra No.-1650 from the Tehsildar, Barmer. The Tehsidlar, Barmer vide its letter dated 15.09.2022 has informed to the answering respondent that nature of land of Khasra No.-1650 is germumkin bhakhar and inadvertently in computerized jamabandi of Samvat-2057- 2060, nature of Khasra No.-1650 was mentioned as Pahadi & Parvat (charagah hetu). From above factual position