The Municipal Board retains authority under Section 73-B of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 2009, to cancel registered pattas issued through fraud despite previous registrations.

ORDER :

1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayer :-

A. by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the order dated 01.04.2025 (Annexure-4) passed by the District Collector, Jaisalmer and entire proceedings initiated for cancellation of registered patta may kindly be declared illegal and be quashed and set-aside.

B. Any other appropriate writ, order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner.

C. Writ petition filed by the petitioner may kindly be allowed with costs.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent – Municipal Board, Pokran issued a public notice in a local newspaper, wherefrom the petitioner came to know that patta issued in his favour on 15.10.2024 was proposed to be cancelled. Anticipating further action, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition, whereby the action of the Municipal Board, Pokran so also the communication issued by the District Collector dated 01.04.2025 have been challenged.

2.1 Further, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the patta in question was issued after following due process of law and later patta was got registered. If at all the authorities intend to proceed against the petitioner for cancellation of patta, then they were required to proceed in accordance with law by approaching competent civil court. The respondents have no authority to proceed under Section 73 -B of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 2009 (‘the Act of 2009’).

2.2 Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on following judgments :-

(1) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5648/2004 : Ramchandra Vs. District Collector, Hanumangarh & Ors., decided on 15.03.2016.

(2) D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No. 899/2017 : State of Rajasthan & Ors. vs. Smt. Parvati Devi & Ors., decided on 01.11.2017.

(3) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9438/2018 : Gopal Patel Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr., decided on 02.02.2021.

(4) D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No. 16/2022 : Smt. Pankhu Bai Vs. Shailesh Kumar & Ors., decided on 24.01.2022.

3. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents states that based on a complaint, a committee was constituted by the District Collector and thereafter, considering the report submitted by the committee, impugned communication dated 01.04.2025 was issued, wherein directions were given to the Municipality to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law. It is further stated that patta in question was issued in collusive manner while playing fraud upon the Municipal Board.

3.1 On the said submission, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the District Collector has not only directed to proceed in accordance with law but a positive direction has been given to cancel the pattas.

3.2 At this stage, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the impugned communication dated 01.04.2025 issued by the District Collector may be quashed and set-aside and the respondents may be given liberty to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

5. The petitioner has questioned the competence of the District Collector in issuing the communication dated 01.04.2025, however, this Court does not intend to deliberate the said issue, more particularly, in view of the fact that learned counsel for the respondents has fairly agreed that the said communication may be quashed and set-aside.

5.1 As far as the proposed action is concerned, the same is based on the power conferred upon the Municipal Board under Section 73 -B of the Act of 2009. For ready reference, -B of the Act of 2009 is