Honble SAXENA, J. — The petitioner by filing this writ petition has prayed that by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the impugned order dated 28.2.83 (Annex.6) passed by the learned Land Acquisition Officer cum Assistant Commissioner, Colonisation, Rajasthan Canal Project, Suratgarh be quashed and the respondents be restrained from interfering with their cultivatory possession over the disputed land.

(2). The admitted facts of this case are that petitioners purchased agricultural land bearing Khasra No.65 measuring thirty six bighas and sixteen biswas situated in village Tethar from khatedars Sultan and Bhagirath. That land was acquired by the State Govt. for Ghaghar Canal. The petitioners applied for compensation for the land so acquired. The State Govt. vide its notification No.F.4. (2) RCPD/61 - II dt.7.2.1962 published in Rajasthan Gazette part IV-C dated 26.4.1962 appointed all the Assistant Colonisation Commissioners, Rajasthan Canal Project to perform the functions of Collector under the Land Acquisition Act within the districts of Ganga Nagar, Bikaner and Jaisalmer in connection with the working of the Rajasthan Canal Project. Therefore, the Assistant Commissioner, Colonisation, Rajasthan Canal Project, Suratgarh, in the capacity of the Land Acquisition Officer under the Rajasthan land Acquisition Act by his order dated 11.6.82 (Ex.1) allowed thirty seven bighas and ten biswas of Land in exchange for their acquired land and ordered that possession thereof be given to them. The land so exchanged in favour of the petitioners also included the land of kila Nos. 6 to 25 measuring 19 bighas & twelve biswas of square No.265/472 in Chak 2 L.M.A. A communication dated 17.6.82 (Annex.2) was also sent by the said Land Acquisition Officer to the petitioners informing them of the exchange of the land allowed in their favour. In compliance of orders Annexs. 1 and 2, the petitioners were handed over the actual physical possession of the said land on 20.7.82 vide certificates Annexs. 3 and 3-A. The certificate Annex.3-A pertains to the disputed land comprising of square No.265/472 of Chak No.2 L.M.A.

(3). It appears that on 7.9.82, Bakta Ram, who is father of respondent No.3 Mala Ram, filed an application Annex.5 alleging that the lands in square No.265/472 of Chak 2 L.M.A. were previously allotted to him on temporary cultivation basis alongwith other lands; that out of the total land so allotted to him, some land was allotted to him on permanent basis; that the land falling in square No.265/472, was a surplus land with him, which could not be permanently allotted to him as per Rules and that for that surplus land, his major sons were entitled for allotment under the provisions of R.13(5) of the Rajasthan Colonisation (Allotment and Sale of Govt. Land in Rajasthan Canal Colony Area ) Rules, 1975. He, therefore, prayed that the disputed land of square No.265/472 of Chak 2 L.M.A., which was allowed in exchange to the petitioners, be cancelled on the ground that the application of his son for allotment of the said land was pending. Respondent No.2 issued notice of the application Annex.5 to petitioners, who opposed the same. However, the respondent No.2 by his impugned order dated 28.2.83 (Annex.6) reviewed his previous order Annex.1 and cancelled the exchange of 15 bighas of land in square No.265/472 in Chak 2 L.M.A. on the ground that respondent No.3 Mala Ram was entitled under R.13 (5) of the Rules 1975 for allotment of the said land, being the surplus land of his father. He further directed the Tehsildar to submit proposal for another land, which could be allotted to the petitioners in exchange.

(4). The respondents No.l and 2 in their reply have admitted this factual position but submitted that the respondent No.2 Land Acquisition Officer-cum-Assistant Commissioner, Colonisation, Suratgarh did not make an award as provided u/s.ll of the Rajasthan Land Acquisition Act and, as such no award was filed u/s.l2.However, they have adm

Click Here to Read the rest of this document