A.K. MATHUR, J.—All these five writ petitions involve a similar question of law and fact, therefore, they are disposed of by a common order.

2. For the convenient disposal of all the writ petitions, the facts given in the case Balkishan Vs. State of Rajasthan S.B. Civil Writ Petition no 791/8.9 are taken into consideration.

3. Petitioner is in possession of a plot of land situated between Krishi Upaj Mandi and F.C.I. Godown near Lalgarh Railway Station. This area is within the municipality of Bikaner and is situated in the area. The area is Kachchi Basti and is known as Indira Nagar Kachchi Basti. This is part of revenue village Beechwali. It is submitted that the State Government has issued from time to time notification and circulars for regularising the possession of these persons who are found in possession of the land at a particular date specified in the notification. Such regularisation was forgery done by the Municipality for Nazul lands lying within their jurisdiction. Thereafter this jurisdiction was conferred upon the Urban Improvement Trust, Bikaner in relation to the lands within their jurisdiction. Petitioner applied for the regularisation of his land before the Urban Improvement Trust, Bikaner and it was submitted that the petitioners application was allowed and the petitioners land was regularised on payment of a sum of Rs. 6, 150, 65p. It is submitted that after regularisation the Urban Improvement Trust Bikaner issued no objection certificate on 27th October, 1988 in favour of the petitioner to the Assistant Engineer Rajasthan State Electricity Board, Bikaner and to Assistant Engineer Public Health Engineer Department for grant of electric and water connection. It is submitted that on 16th February, 1989, Tehsildar Bikaner came over his land with the police force accompanied with the Collector. It is submitted that the Tehsildar with the help of the police officer and the labour engaged by him demolished the construction of the petitioner as well as boundary wall. This action was taken by the Collector and Tehsildar without any notice to the petitioner. The petitioner and other persons who has raised the construction were demolished on 16th of January 1989. All these persons approached the Collector and Urban Improvement Trust but without any result. Thereafter petitioner filed a suit in the court of Munsif Magistrate Bikaner. The Urban Improvement Trust and the State of Rajasthan objected to the jurisdiction of the court and contended that this is a revenue land, therefore, the Revenue Court is only competent to try this suit. Thereafter petitioner withdrew the suit with permission to file a fresh suit. Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition and has prayed that respondents may be restrained from interfering with the petitioners possession over the land and same be regularised by the U.I.T. It has also been prayed that permission may be granted to the petitioner for raising construction over the plot. Ultimately petitioner has prayed that the respondent may be directed to hand over the possession to the petitioner.

4. A return has been filed by the respondents and respondents have denied the ground raised by the petitioner, it has been submitted that no regu-larisation was granted to the petitioner. It is further submitted that this land does not belong to the U.I.T. and this land belongs to the Revenue Department. As such the respondent U.I.T. has no jurisdiction whatsoever. It was submitted that it is true that the petitioners moved an application and in that application it was submitted that same may be regularised in accordance with the decision of the committee. It is further submitted that the petitioner on his own deposited the aforesaid amount.

5. I have heard both the learned counsel at length. A serious dispute was raised that whether this land belongs to the U.I.T. or to the . Revenue Department. Initially a show cause notice was issued on 5th April, 1989 and an order

Click Here to Read the rest of this document