ORDER :

Ganesh Ram Meena, J.

The petitioners have preferred the present writ petition with a prayer to direct the respondents to sanction the mutation in favour of the petitioners in compliance with the decision dated dated 27.05.2015 passed by the Board of Revenue, Rajasthan, Ajmer (for short 'the Second Appellate Authority') in Appeal No.5501/ 2012/ Jaipur (Kailash & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.).

2. The brief facts of the case are that Sualal and Shrawanlal both sons of Gyarsilal @ Balya filed a suit No.471/2002 for declaration of khatedari rights and permanent injunction before the Court of Sub Divisional Officer, Amber (for short 'the trial court') with the averments that the family members of the plaintiffs Moti @ Motya s/o Laxman adopted Shri Gyarsilal @ Balya, father of plaintiffs Sualal and Shrawanlal. Moti @ Motya expired in the year 1962 and Gyarsilal @ Balya also expired in the year 1979. The land bearing Khasra No.173 measuring 8 Bigha 8 Biswa and Khasra No. 174 measuring 3 Bigha 10 Biswa (for short 'the land in question') were in cultivatory possession of Shri Gyarsilal @ Balya- the father of the plaintiffs and the grandfather Moti @ Motya since the time of Jagirdar. It was further stated that the predecessors of the plaintiffs are in continuous possession of the land in question since prior to Samavat 2005 and they have also dug a well and constructed a mud hut (kachha jhonpda) and are residing there. It was further stated that at the time of commencement of the RAJASTHAN TENANCY ACT , 1955 (for short 'the Act of 1955') the predecessors of the plaintiffs were in cultivatory possession of the land as a tenant and therefore, in view of the provisions of the Act of 1955, they got the khatedari rights but the Settlement Officers in-stead of recording the land in the name of Moti @ Motya, wrongly entered the land as a government land in the category of 'pasture land'. Such entry of the land in question as a pasture land is illegal and arbitrary. It was further stated that when the plaintiffs came to know that the land has been wrongly recorded as a government land, they filed the suit for declaration and permanent injunction.

3. The defendant No.2- Gram Panchayat, Rampura, in place of filing the written statement submitted a letter of the Gram Panchayat, referred to the Sub Divisional Officer, Amber, wherein it was stated that the land in question is being used as a pasture land since past 30 years and the plaintiffs are trying to take over the land illegally. The proceedings under Section 91 of the LAND REVENUE ACT , 1956 (for short 'the Act of 1956') were also initiated against the plaintiffs and prayed to dismiss the suit.

4. The defendant No.1-State of Rajasthan even after several opportunities being allowed did not submit the written statement and the opportunity for submitting the written statement qua the defendant No.1 was closed on 22.04.2000. The defendant No.2- Gram Panchayat, Rampura, also after submitting the letter did not appear before the trial court and ex-parte proceedings were ordered on 06.05.1999 against it.

5. The plaintiffs submitted certain documentary evidence and also oral evidence of four witnesses namely; Sualal, Mangla Ram, Shyam Lal and Shrawan, whereas for defendant No.2, oral evidence of Ram Singh Bareth- Halka Patwari was recorded. After filing of the suit, the land was ordered to be vested with the Jaipur Development Authority (for short 'the JDA').

6. The trial Court vide its judgment dated 09.07.2002 dismissed the suit of the plaintiffs.

7. Aggrieved by the judgment dated 09.07.2002 passed by the trial court, the plaintiffs Sualal and legal representatives of plaintiff Shrawanlal filed an Appeal No.26/2005 under Section 223 of