AVNEESH JHINGAN
Ramesh S/o Kishan – Appellant
Versus
Manguram S/o Ram Sahai – Respondent
ORDER :
1. This petition is filed seeking quashing of order dated 21.08.2017 passed by the Board of Revenue, Ajmer (hereafter ‘the Board’).
2. The relevant facts are that patta for khasra No. 128/150 measuring two bigha eight biswas situated in village Govindpura, Tehsil Thanagazi, District Alwar was allotted to the petitioner vide order dated 08.06.1989. The respondents on 07.08.2000 filed an application under Rule 14 (4) of the Rajasthan Land Revenue (Allotment of Land for Agricultural Purposes) Rules, 1970 (for short ‘Rules of 1970’). The Additional Collector vide order dated 12.04.2001 set aside the order of allotment. The Revenue Appellate Authority (hereafter ‘RAA’) allowed the appeal upholding the order of allotment on 11.09.2008. The appeal of the respondent was accepted by the Board on 21.08.2017. Hence, the petition.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that application under Rule 14 (4) of the Rules of 1970 was filed after the delay of eleven years. The petitioner had proved cultivating possession on the land. The grounds prescribed under Rule 14 (4) of the Rules of 1970 for cancellation of the allotment were not applicable in present case.
4. As per contra, the l
Mansa Ram v. S.P. Pathak and Ors. (1984) 1 SCC 125
Mahendra Singh and Anr. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. 1989 (1) RLR 221
The court ruled that land allotment cannot be canceled after significant delay without proof of fraud or misrepresentation.
The main legal point established is that the power to cancel land allotment must be exercised within a reasonable time, and khatedari rights cannot be withdrawn after their conferment.
Fraud vitiates all acts; a transferee cannot assert rights over a void allotment, and failure to provide notice does not confer legitimacy on such a transaction.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the correct interpretation and application of the Rajasthan Colonization Rules, 1975, particularly regarding the definition of 'landless person'....
The cancellation of land allotment based on the violation of land transfer rules under Rule 6(3) & (4) and the authority to cancel allotment under Rule 6(10) of the Rules of 1972.
The Board of Revenue correctly upheld agricultural allotments following proper procedures, and significant delays in filing petitions do not warrant judicial intervention.
The court upheld the dismissal of the appellant's writ petition, finding no violations of the Rajasthan Colonisation Rules and affirming the finality of prior allotments.
The court established that long-standing land allotments should not be canceled without substantial justification, emphasizing the need for fair treatment of agriculturalists.
Non-compliance with lease conditions and non-utilization of allotted land can justify the cancellation of the lease by the authority.
Civil Court decrees must be respected by Revenue Courts; cancellation of land allotments requires statutory authority and adherence to reasonable timelines.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.