The Permanent Lok Adalat lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate matters involving the issuance of patta, as such disputes necessitate a full legal process that includes determining complex civil rights.

ORDER :

1. The instant writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India has been instituted by the petitioner-trust assailing the order dated 17.01.2018 passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat, Bikaner, whereby directions have been issued for grant of patta in favour of the respondent.

2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the respondent had filed an application under Section 22B of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (hereinafter to be referred as “The Act of 1987”) seeking issuance of patta in respect of a plot comprised in Khasra Nos. 546/547 and also paid compensation, alleging deposit of conversion charges.

2.1 The petitioner-Trust, in its reply, specifically pleaded that the land in question had not been mutated in its favour and, therefore, issuance of patta was legally impermissible.

2.2 The Permanent Lok Adalat (hereinafter to be referred as “PLA”) directed issuance of patta and awarded compensation and costs. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner-Trust has invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court seeking quashing of the impugned order as being contrary to law and jurisdiction.

3. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and perused the annexures annexed with the writ petition.

4. Upon consideration of the material placed on record, it emerges as an admitted position that the applicant had applied for issuance of patta in respect of a plot bearing Khasra Nos. 546 and 547 situated at village Kismidesar, admeasuring 320 square yards, during the year 2014. It is further undisputed that the applicant deposited the entire conversion charges as well as the development fee in accordance with the demand raised by the competent authority. The order passed by the court below further reveals that the applicant executed the requisite certificate on his own behalf and duly submitted the same to the concerned authority. The applicant has specifically disclosed that vide order dated 09.07.2014, the Urban Development Department, Government of Rajasthan, issued guidelines providing for issuance of patta in respect of applications submitted during the that period, subject to deposit of the full prescribed amount. It is also borne out from the record that the non-issuance of the lease in favour of the applicant is sought to be justified on two grounds only, namely, that the concerned Arazi Khasra has not been mutated in the applicant’s name and that the applicant did not submit the original ownership documents within the stipulated time.

5. Before adverting to the merits of the case, it would be apposite to notice the statutory provisions governing the controversy involved in the present matter. For the sake of ready reference and proper appreciation, Sections 22A and 22B of the Act of 1987 are reproduced hereinbelow:-

22A. Definitions.—In this Chapter and for the purposes of sections 22 and 23, unless the context otherwise requires —

(a) “Permanent Lok Adalat” means a Permanent Lok Adalat established under sub-section (1) of section 22B;

(b) “public utility service” means any—

(i) transport service for the carriage of passengers or goods by air, road or water;

(ii) postal, telegraph or telephone service;

(iii) supply of power, light or water to the public by any establishment;

(iv) system of public conservancy or sanitation;

(v) service in hospital or dispensary;

(vi) insurance service, and includes any service which the Central Government or the State Government, as the case may be, in the public interest, by notification, declare to be a public utility se