Hon'ble ASOPA, J.—By this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof for quashing of the judgment of the Sub Divisional Officer, Jaipur-I dated 2.9.1996 (Anx.8) and those of Board of Revenue dated 31.1.2003 (Anx.13) and 11.3.2003 (Anx.14) and has further prayed that the suit for correction of entries, declaration and perpetual injunction filed by the plaintiff-petitioner (hereinafter referred to as `the petitioner’) against the defendant non petitioners No.6 to 16 may kindly be ordered to be decreed.

2. Briefly stated, the relevant facts of the case, are as under:

3. That the petitioner filed a revenue suit for correction of entries, declaration and perpetual injunction against the defendant-non-petitioners regarding 60 Bighas of land situated in Jamdoli, Tehsil and district Jaipur which had been allotted to Yasin Khan, father of the petitioner, on account of his being a soldier, by the erstwhile Jaipur State which had wrongly been entered partly as Sawai Chak and partly as Charagarh and had been further wrongly placed at the disposal of the Jaipur Development Authority (J.D.A.). The Patta issued by the erstwhile Jaipur State in favour of Yasin Khan, father of the petitioner,is on record as Annexure-3, who died on 8.5.1992. Subsequently, on the strength of the Will, suit was filed by the petitioner on 04.05.1994 before the Sub Divisional Officer, Jaipur-I.

4. J.D.A. filed written statement denying all facts and further contending that since the suit land had been partly entered as Sawai Chak and partly as Charagah, the same vested in the JDA under section 64 of the Jaipur Development Authority Act, 1982 (in short `the J.D.A.Act’). The Sub Divisional Officer, Jaipur-I framed five Issues out of which Issue No.1 was with regard to the allotment of land to the father of the petitioner and other Issues relates regarding correction of entries, declaration and perpetual injunction. Issue No.1 was decided in favour of the plaintiff and it was held that the petitioner’s father Yasin Khan Soldier was entered as tenant of the suit land prior to new settlement. However, remaining Issues were decided against the petitioner (plaintiff).

5. The petitioner filed first appeal before the Revenue Appellate Authority wherein Gopal Sharma was appointed as the Commissioner on 9.6.1996 for inspection of the site and for report about possession of the disputed land. The Commissioner inspected the site on 20.6.1998 and on 29.6.1998, he submitted report before the Revenue Appellate Authority, Jaipur stating that four Pucca rooms stood constructed in Khasra No.119 and a Board in the name of `Nisar Ahmed Fouzi Krishi Farm, Jamdoli’ was there, and one room of bricks also stood constructed on Khasra No. 119 and 8-10 fruit trees were standing on the same.

6. On 3.6.2002, the Revenue Appellate Authority accepted the first appeal filed by the petitioner and decreed the suit holding that the Settlement Department had no authority to change the previous entries and to record the disputed land partly as Sawai Chak and partly as Charagarh. The Revenue Appellate Authority also confirmed the finding of fact given by the Sub Divisional Officer, Jaipur-I on Issue No.1 i.e. regarding allotment of the land in question to the father of the petitioner and consequent entry in the name of Yasin Khan in respect of the suit land prior to the settlement of Samwat Year 2015 and the same entry should have been repeated by the Settlement Department.

7. Against the said judgment of the Revenue Appellate Authority, second appeal was filed by the private respondent and the JDA. The Board of Revenue reversed the findings of the Revenue Appellate Authority on Issues No.2 to 5 by holding that the Khatedari right is neither absolute nor in-alienable nor unchangeable nor permanent and continuation of the same would be regulated by the provisions of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 (in short `the Tenancy Act’) and further, in the i

Click Here to Read the rest of this document