TYAGI, J.—Petitioner Govind Murari has filed this writ petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution and it arises out of the following circumstances.

2. The petitioner is a member of a Housing Co-operative Society which is known as Ramjipura Housing Co-operative Society Ltd., Jaipur. It is alleged that this society purchased agricultural lands bearing khasra No 2/196 measuring 17 bighas and 17 biswas and khasra No. 17 measuring 4 bighas and 8 biswas in village Ramjipura. I he mutation of the aforesaid land was effected in the name of the society on 27th of January, 1967 It is said that the society carved out certain plots for the construction of houses out of this agricultural land and allotted plot No. A-21 to the petitioner in the year 1968. on 1st March, 1970 this plot was exchanged with the mutual consent of one Kaluram, another member of the society. The document showing the exchange of the plot is Annexure 2 on the record. Since there was a house already constructed on that exchanged plot the petitioner had to pay Rs- 10,000/- to Shri Kaluram. The petitioner thus claims to be the owner of the exchanged plot with a house constructed thereon. The petitioners house is situate in a developing colony of Jaipur town known as Shasthri Colony,

3. On 18th of April, 1970 a notice purported to have been issued by the Tehsildar, Sanganer dated 16th April 1970 was found pasted on the house of the petitioner stating that the persons who claim themselves to be the owners of the Kotries may show cause as to why action may not be taken against them to eject from the land under sec. 91 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956. Instead of approaching the Teshildar and putting his case before him the petitioner has knoc-ked the doors of this Court by filing this writ petition whereby he has challenged the authority of the. Tehsildar to issue such a notice under sec. 9! of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, by treating the petitioner as a trespasser under S. 90A of that Act. Sec. 90A has been challenged by the petitioner as being repugnant to the provisions of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act of 1955, and has, therefore, prayed that sec. 90A of Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1966, be declared void and the notice issued by the Tehsildar on 16th April, 1970 (Ex. 3) be quashed and the Tehsildar or other revenue authority be restrained from taking any action against the petitioner under sec. 91 of the Rajas than Land Revenue Act.

4. No reply has been filed by the respondents Mr. Tiwari learned Deputy Govt, Advocate, has however, appeared on behalf of the respondents, and raised a preliminary objection that the petitioner has no locus standi to file this writ petition because he does not possess any legal right in the land According to Mr Tiwari the agricultural land stands mutated in the name of the society and that society is not entitled to transfer a small portion of that land to the petitioner in violation of the provisions of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 which governs the transfer of the agricultural lands. It is also urged that sec. 90A has been enacted by the legislature on a very sound basis that agricultural land should be used ouly for agricultural purpose and not for any other purpose otherwise the economy of the country which largely depends on agricultural resources shall be badly hit

5. I may first of all consider the preliminary objection raised by the learned Government Advocate. It is an established fact that the land in dispute out of which the disputed plot had been carved out is an agricultural land and has been recorded in the khata of the Cooperative Society. There is no document to show that the disputed plot of land has been alienated or disposed of by the society in favour of the petitioner in accordance with the provisions of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955, and, therefore, the khatedari rights of the Co-operative Society have not yet extinguished from this plot of land The transfer of an agricultural land can be made only in accordanc

Click Here to Read the rest of this document