The issuance of a Patta for installing a Cabin under Rule 157(1) of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996 is invalid without possession of an old house.

Order :

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 12.07.2024 (Annex.6) passed by the District Collector, Sanchor in Revision Petition No.15/2023 whereby the revision petition filed by the Gram Panchayat, Bargaon, Panchayat Samiti, Raniwara District Sanchor for canceling the Patta dated 25.09.2019 issued in favour of the petitioner has been allowed.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the application submitted by the petitioner was duly considered by the Gram Panchayat, Bargaon and based on that, the Patta was issued in favour of the petitioner on 25.09.2019 by the Gram Panchayat, Bargaon under Rule 157 (1) of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Rules of 1996’). Learned counsel submits that the petitioner simply filed an application for issuance of Patta for installation of a Cabin and if the Gram Panchayat, Bargaon has considered same under Rule 157 (1) of the Rules of 1996 then the petitioner should not be punished for the same. Learned counsel further submits that the order passed by the Revisional Court on the face of it, is not based upon correct appreciation of the facts involved in the case. He, therefore, prays that the writ petition filed by the petitioner may be allowed and the order dated 12.07.2024 passed by the Revisional Court may be quashed and set aside.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the Patta for installing a Cabin cannot be issued by the Gram Panchayat, Bargaon under Rule 157 (1) of the Rules of 1996. he submits that for issuance of a Patta under Rule 157 (1)of the Rules of 1996, the condition precedent is that a person must have the possession of an old house and in the present case, since the same is conspicuously absent, therefore, the Patta could not have been issued under Rule 157 (1) of the Rules of 1996. He submits that in the present case, the Patta has been issued in favour of the petitioner for installing a Cabin, therefore, there is no question of regularizing the old house of the petitioner in view of Rule 157 (1) of the Rules of 1996. He submits that the Patta issued in favour of the petitioner is in gross violation of the Rules of 1996, therefore, the revisional court has rightly allowed the revision petition filed by the Gram Panchayat, Bargaon. He, therefore, prays that the writ petition filed by the petitioner may be dismissed and the order dated 12.07.2024 passed by the Revisional Court may be upheld.

5. I have considered the submissions made at the bar and also gone through the relevant record of the case including the order dated 12.07.2024 passed by the District Collector, Sanchor.

6. The admitted facts in the present case are that the petitioner was issued a Patta in the year 2019 for installing a Cabin. As per Rule 157 (1) of the Rules of 1996, Patta can be issued only for regularization of the old house. In the present case, since old house is not in possession of the petitioner rather a Cabin has been installed by the petitioner under the garb of the said Patta issued by the Gram Panchayat, Bargaon.

7. In the opinion of this court, the action taken by the Gram Panchayat for issuing patta in favour of the petitioner for installing a Cabin under Rule 157 (1) of the Rules of 1996 is in complete violation of the mandate of law. The revisional Court has rightly allowed the revision petition filed by the Gram panchayat, Bargaon after considering all the facts and circumstances of the case. Neither the petitioner has been able to point out any illegality or infirmity committed by the Revisional Court nor the same appear to have been committed by the revisional court while passing the order dated 12.07.2024. Therefore, the present writ petition is dismissed being bereft of merit and order dated 12.07.2024 passed by the Revisional Court is upheld.