The authority issuing the order was competent despite a misapplication of the seal, which did not affect the validity of the order.

Order :

1. The prayer made in the special appeal writs is as follows :-

“It is therefore, humbly and most respectfully prayed that this Special Appeal may kindly be allowed and:

a). The impugned order/judgment dated 27.01.2027 passed by the learned Single Judge in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1842/2025 (Kamlesh Meena Vs. State & Ors.), may kindly be quashed and set aside and the writ petition filed by the appellant-petitioner may kindly be allowed and the transfer order dated 15.01.2025 may kindly be quashed and set aside.

b). Any other appropriate order, direction which this Hon’ble court deems fit in the interest of justice and the appellants- petitioner may kindly be passed.”

2. Learned counsel for the appellant has drawn attention of this Court to Section 3 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 , which reads as follows :-

3. Interpretation – In this Act, unless the subject or context otherwise requires -

(i) “Land Records Officer” shall mean the collector and shall include Additional or Assistant Land Records Officer;

3[(ia) “Municipality” shall have the meaning assigned to it by the Rajasthan Town Municipalities Act, 1951 (Rajasthan Act 23 of 1951) or any other municipal law for the time being in force;

(ib) “Nazul Land” shall mean abadi land within the limits of a municipality or a panchayat circle or a village, town or city, vesting in the State Government;

(ic) “Panchayat circle” shall have the meaning assigned to it by the Rajasthan Panchayat Act, 1953 (Rajasthan Act 21 of 1953) or any other Panchayat law for the time being in force;]

(ii) “Prescribed” shall mean prescribed by this Act or by rules made under this Act;

(iii) “Recognised Agent” of a party shall, subject to rules made under this Act, mean a person authorised in writing by such party to make appearances and applications and to do other acts on his behalf;

4[(iiia) “Revenue Appellate Authority” shall mean the officer appointed as such authority under Section 20-A;]

(iv) “Settlement Officer” shall include an Assistant Settlement Officer;

v) “Village” shall mean the tract of land which ha sbeen recognised and recorded, or may here after be recognised & recorded to be a village;

(vi) “Reference” to an officer appointed under this Act shall be construed to include references to an additional officer of the same grade likewise apointed;

(vii) “Words and expressions” defined in the Rajasthan Tenanacy Act, 1955 (Rajasthan Act 3 of 1955) shall, wherever used herein, be construed to have the meaning assigned to them by the said Act; and (viii) “Words & expressions used to denote” the possessor of any right, title and interest shall be deemed to include the predecessors and successors in right, title or interest of such person.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant makes a limited submission that the order should have been passed in the capacity Land Record Officer and not in the capacity of District Magistrate.

4. Learned AAG submits that the authority was same but a wrong seal by mistake was applied.

5. This Court on findings that the authority issuing the order was competent, but the person was holding three different designations viz. District Magistrate, District Collector and District Collector Land Records, and therefore, the wrongful application of seal was made, which does not call for any interference of this Court.

6. Thus, the special appeal writ is dismissed.