SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2013 Supreme(Raj) 217

(Rajasthan High Court)
Shreyansh Daga Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. (Dr. Kothari, J.)
HON'BLE DR. VINEET KOTHARI, J.
Shreyansh Daga
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Anr.
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3881 of 2011, decided on 17.07.2013

Advocates Appeared
N.M. Lodha, Sr. Advocate assisted by V.D. Dadhich, for Petitioner;
Anand Purohit, Sr. Advocate and AAG, for Respondent-State;
P.P. Choudhary, Sr. Advocate assisted by Amit Dave, for Respondent No.2, Jorawar Singh S/o Mrigendra Singh

Headnote:Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956, Sec. 83, 90-B, 23 read with Rajasthan Land Reforms and Acquisition of Land Owners Estate Act, 1963, Sec. 9 — Powers of Hon'ble Revenue Minister to initiate proceedings under Sec. 83? — Held — The powers of revision u/Sec. 83 of the State Government can be exercised only with respect to non-judicial proceedings not connected with settlement — Sec. 23 provides that the disputes as to entries in the record of rights and annual registers and even mutation upon succession, transfer or otherwise are included in the list of "judicial matters" in the first Schedule — Initiation of proceedings against the petitioner u/Sec. 83 by the Hon'ble Revenue Minister was without jurisdiction and void-ab-initio. (Paras 29 to 32)

       Petition allowed.

        jktLFkku Hkw-jktLo vf/kfu;e] 1956] /kkjk 83] 90-[k] 23 lifBr jktLFkku Hkwfe lq/kkj o Hkw-Lokfe;ksa dh lEink dk vtZu vf/kfu;e] 1963] /kkjk 9 & /kkjk 83 ds rgr dk;Zokgh vkjEHk djus dh ekuuh; jktLo ea=h dh 'kfDr;ka \ & vfHkfu/kkZfjr & /kkjk 83 ds rgr jkT; ljdkj dh iqujh{k.k dh 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx dsoy xSj U;kf;d dk;Zokgh ds lEcU/k esa gh dh tk ldrh gS tks cUnkscLr ls lEcfU/kr u gks & /kkjk 23 ;g micU/k djrh gS fd LoRo ds vfHkys[k esa bUnzkt lEcU/kh fookn vkSj okf"kZd jftLVjksa o mRrjkf/kdkj] vUrj.k ;k vU;Fkk ij ukekUrjdj.k lEcU/kh fookn Hkh izFke vuqlwph esa U;kf;d ekeyksa dh lwph esa lfEefyr gS &jktLo ea=h }kjk izkFkhZ ds fo:) /kkjk 83 ds rgr dk;Zokgh vkjEHk djuk vf/kdkfjrk foghu vkSj vkjEHk ls gh 'kwU; FkkA

       ;kfpdk Lohdkj dhA ¼in la[;k 29 ls 32½

       

Hon'ble Dr. KOTHARI, J.—By this petition, the petitioner has challenged the impugned notice/communication Annex.6 dated 20.4.2011 and also the representation filed by the private respondent Jorawar Singh S/o Mrigendra Singh, a minor through his natural guardian Smt. Kokila Singh on the basis of which the impugned proceedings are sought to be initiated against the petitioner under Section 83 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956.

2. The facts in nutshell are like this.

3. The Ex-ruler of Jodhpur State is said to have the agricultural and measuring 316 bighas situated in Khasra No.4 of village Kacholia Beria (Tehsil Jodhpur, which land was under the cultivatory possession of Col. Mohan Singh Bhati and the said land is said to have been transferred by way of lease to him and for seeking correction in the mutation entries, the said Col. Mohan Singh Bhati moved an application, which was registered as case No.90/70 (Mohan Singh Bhati vs. Controller of Household, Jodhpur) by the Assistant Records Officer, Jodhpur. It is further stated in the writ petition that out of the said 316 bighas of land, 256.10 bighas was under the cultivatory possession of Narendra Singh Bhati S/o Col. Mohan Singh Bhati for quite long time and he invested huge amount in developing the said land, therefore, for recording his name as Khatedar of 256 bighas & 10 biswas of land, he moved the Assistant Record Officer and vide order dated 25.5.1970, the Assistant Record Officer mutated the said 256.10 bighas of land in the name of Narendra Singh Bhati and remaining 56.10 bighas of land in the name of Col. Mohan Singh Bhati without any objection by Col. Mohan Singh Bhati.

4. On 6.6.1972, out of his holding of 256.10 bighas of land, the said Narendra Singh Bhati gifted 86.10 bighas of land to one Smt. Krishna Kak and another 46.10 bighas of land was gifted by him to Ms. Kamla Bhalla and mutation entries in favour of these two donees were also recorded by the concerned revenue authorities on 6.6.1972. On 23.12.2003, Ms. Kamla Bhalla, one of the donees, sold 45 bighas of land to the present petitioner - Shreyansh Daga and one bighas to another person, namely; Abhinav Kumbhat. The said purchasers on the basis of their title documents got the said agricultural land converted and regularized in their names under Section 90B of the Rajasthan Land Revenue act, 1956 from the competent authority UIT, Jodhpur vide Annex.4 dated 6.4.2005 and the said authority upon surrender of 45.10 bighas of land and UIT, Jodhpur gave back 26.14 bighas of land under Section 90-B of the Act to the said purchaser-petitioner-Shreyansh Daga and accordingly the Patta was issued and registered in his favour on 16.4.2010 vide Annex.5.

5. It is the case of the petitioner that the order of mutation dated 25.5.1970 in favour of his seller Ms. Kamla Bhalla is a judicial order and the said order dated 25.5.1970 attained finality as nobody challenged the said order at any point of time nor the transfer by way of gift was ever challenged even by Col. Mohan Singh Bhati himself, who was alive upto the year 1995 and by Narendra Singh Bhati upto 2010 while said Shri Narendra Singh Bhati was alive.

6. It is also stated in the writ petition that since the said agricultural land continued to be recorded in the revenue records as and of Ex-ruler of Jodhpur, on account of coming into force of the Rajasthan Land Reforms & Acquisition of and Owners Estate Act, 1963, the said Col. Mohan Singh Bhati and Narendra Singh Bhati were even given notice under Section 9 of the said Act of 1963 treating them as trespasser, which proceedings were challenged by them before the High Court by way of writ petition, namely SBCWP No. 1858/75, which came to be allowed by the learned Single Judge of this Court on 26.3.1981 vide judgment reported in the case of Col. Mohan Singh Bhati vs. State - 181 WLN UC 62. The Division Bench of this Court is also stated to have upheld the said judgment of learned Single Judge on 19.2.1982 while dismiss











































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top