Ownership of land recorded under a deity cannot be transferred; any attempts to do so result in void transactions, reaffirming perpetual minor status of deities.

JUDGMENT :

(Nupur Bhati, J.)

The instant writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India with the following prayers:-

i) the writ petition may kindly be allowed with costs;

ii) by an appropriate writ, order or direction the judgment dated 29/8/1991, ANNEXURE P/3, judgment dated 22/3/1993, ANNEXURE P/4 and the judgment dated 11/10/2000 ANNEXURE P/5 may kindly be quashed and set aside and the order dated June 12,1986, ANNEXURE P/2 may kindly ordered to be maintained;

iii) by an appropriate writ, order or direction grant any other relief, which is considered just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case;

2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent No. 6 Gorakhnath was holding khatedari right in land of khasra No. 714 -Rakba 12 bigha 15 biswas, Khasra No. 704 - Rakba 6 Bigha 13 Biswas, Khasra No.742 - Rakba 11 bigha 13 Biswas. Khasra No. 741- Rakba 7 Bigha Gair mumkin Bera, total Rakba 36 Bigha 19 Biswas of all four Khasras; respondent No.6 by separate registered sale deeds sold the above land to the petitioners on 30.6.1986 and since then the petitioners are in cultivatory possession over the land in question and the mutation has also been entered in their names on the basis of the registered sale deed and they are the recorded khatedar of the above mentioned land.

3. The respondent No.6 Gorakhnath was recorded as khatedar of the above mentioned land way back in the samvat year 2010 however vide Corrigendum (Shuddhipatra No.9) dated 3.11.1982 (AnnexureP/1) his name was deleted from it and in his place the land was entered in the name of Doli Banam Asan. The respondent No. 6 filed an application before Sub Divisional Officer (SDO) Sojat for cancellation of the said shuddhipatra dated 3.11.1982 and the SDO Sojat vide order dated 12.06.1986 (Annexure P/2) ordered that the position prior to 3.12.1982 be maintained and thus cancelled the Corrigendum (shuddhipatra).

4. That against the order dated 12.06.1986 passed by SDO the respondent No.5 Mangenath filed an appeal before the Revenue Appellate Authority II Jodhpur (Hereinafter referred to as RAA in short) without impleading petitioner as the party, However the appeal filed by respondent. No. 5 was allowed by the Revenue Appellate Authority II Jodhpur vide order dated 29.08.1991 (Annexure-P/3), However as the petitioners were not impleaded as party in the appeal filed by respondent No.5 thus they filed a review application before the Revenue Appellate Authority II Jodhpur which was rejected vide order dated 22.03.1993. (Annexure-P/4).

5. Against the order dated 22.03.1993 the petitioners filed a revision petition before the Board Of Revenue, Ajmer, Rajasthan (hereinafter referred to as BOR in short) and the BOR rejected the revision vide order dated 11.10.2000. (Annexure-P/5).

6. Moreover the land in question was recorded in the name of respondent No. 6 Gorakhnath son of shri Lal Nath as mentioned in Khatoni- Jama bandi. (Annexure-P/6) and the name of petitioners on the basis of the registered sale deed dated 30.6.1986 was entered in the revenue record, in Namantkaran Register. (Annexure- P/7); and as a result of Namantkaran No. 816 dated 31.07.1986 the petitioners' names were recorded as khatedar in Jama bandi Khatoni. (Annexure-P/8).

7. The petitioners being aggrieved of the order dated 11.10.2000 passed by the Board of Revenue Ajmer, (Annexure P/5) and the order dated 29.08.1991 and 22.03.1993 passed by the Revenue Appellate Authority II Jodhpur the petitioner