Hon'ble JAIN, J.—Though the subject matter of both the writ petitions is different, yet the land in question and parties to the proceedings are similar, therefore, on the request of learned counsel for both the parties, both the writ petitions were heard together and are being disposed of finally by this common order.

2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that a Revenue Suit No.252/1985 was filed by the plaintiff-respondents, namely, Kanhaiyalal, Hazarilal and Smt. Meera Devi under Sections 88 and 89 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, in the Court of Assistant Collector & Magistrate, Jaipur (for short, 'the ACM') for declaration to the effect that the total area of agriculture land, bearing Khasra Nos.203 and 204, situated in Village Jhalana-Chaur, Tehsil Sanganer, District Jaipur, was 22 bigha 8 biswa, as the total area of the land has wrongly been entered as 19 bigha 4 biswa in stead of 22 bigha 8 biswa in the last settlement took place in Samvat Year 2015 (corresponding Year 1958), and, as such, the remaining land measuring 3 bigha 4 biswa could not be recorded in their names, therefore, it be declared that the plaintiffs are khatedartenants of the remaining land measuring 3 bigha 4 biswa of Khasra No.203 and 204. In support of their case, the plaintiffs placed on the record a copy of 'jamabandi', 'khasra-girdawari', 'purcha-settlement','settlement-slip','receiptlagaan' and 'statement-of-Patwari-Halka Durga' dated 15th April, 1958.

3. The summons were issued to the defendants and, in response thereto, the defendant State Government filed its written statement through Tehsildar, Sanganer, on 3rd/7th February, 1986, wherein it was admitted that total area of the land of Khasra Nos.203 and 204 was 22 bigha 8 biswa.

4. The issues were framed on 26th February, 1986. The plaintiffs examined PW-1 Hazarilal and PW-2. No evidence was led on behalf of the defendants.

5. The ACM (trainee), Jaipur, vide its judgment dated 21st June, 1986, dismissed the suit. Being aggrieved with the same, an appeal was preferred by the plaintiffs, which was allowed by the Revenue Appellate Authority, Jaipur, vide its judgment dated 2nd August, 1986 and the order of the ACM was set-aside and it was declared that the plaintiffs are khatedar-tenants of the land bearing Khasra No.203 and 204 measuring 22 bigha 8 biswa. It was also declared that the plaintiffs No.1 and 2 are equal share-holders of the land measuring 19 bigha 4 biswa and, in remaining land, the plaintiffs No.1 and 2 will have equal in half share and the plaintiff No.3 Mst. Meera Devi will have half share. Being aggrieved with the aforesaid judgment, the State of Rajasthan preferred second appeal before the Revenue Board but the same was also dismissed vide judgment dated 14th December, 1993.

6. Although, the suit of the plaintiffs for declaration had been decreed by the Revenue Appellate Authority and thereafter by the Revenue Board vide judgment dated 2nd August, 1986 and 14th December, 1993, respectively, as referred above, but there was some error in comparative chart of old and new khasra numbers, therefore, the plaintiff-respondents Kanhaiyalal, Hazarilal and Smt. Meera Devi filed an application in the Court of SDO, II, Jaipur, under Section 136 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act for correction in the revenue record to the extent that in respect of the present Khasra No.291 measuring 0.81 hectare the old Khasra Nos.203 and 204 may be mentioned. The non-applicant No.4 RIICO/petitioner contested the said application by filing written reply dated 6th August, 2001. The non-applicant No.2 State of Rajasthan also filed written-reply dated 30th January, 2002. The learned SDO vide its judgment dated 2nd November, 2004 allowed the application and passed an order that the present Khasra No.291 measuring 0.81 hectare is part of old Khasra No.203 and 204. Being aggrieved with the same, the non-applicant No.4 RIICO filed an appeal before the Divisional Commissioner, Jaipur, which was dismissed vi