HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5570/2003 Hari Narayan Sharma son of Shri Ram Bilas Sharma, resident of Keshav Nagar, Sawai Madhopur, at President of Sanadhya Gaur Brahamin Samaj Mantown, Sawaimadhopur.

----Petitioner Versus

1.State of Rajasthan through Secretary, Local Self Department, Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. The Director cum Deputy Secretary, Local Self Department, Directorate, behind High Court building, Jaipur.

3. The Commissioner, Nagar Parishad, Sawaimadhopur.

4. The Porwal Jain Samaj, Sawaimadhopur through President.

----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Abhishek Pareek For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajendra Prasad, Advocate General with Mr. Tanay Goyal and Mr. Sheetanshu Sharma Mr. N.K. Maloo, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Harsh Pratap Singh, Mr. Ajay Singh Rajawat Mr. Tarun Jain Mr. B.K. Sharma JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Reserved on 14/05/2025 Pronounced on 20/05/2025 Reportable

Order

(1) Factual Matrix…………..………………………………..….…..2 (2) Submissions by counsel for the petitioner……….…..2 (3) Submissions by counsel for the respondents……….4 (4) Discussions and Analysis……………………………..…… (5) Conclusion………….…………………………………….……18 Factual Matrix:

1. By way of filing this writ petition, the petitioner has questioned the legality of the order dated 25.06.2003 passed by the respondent-State, by which the land in question has been allotted to the respondent No.4 under Rule 18 of the Rajasthan Municipalities (Disposal of Urban Land) Rules, 1974 (for short “the Rules of 1974”).

2. The instant writ petition has been filed with the following prayer:

“i) by a writ, order or direction the order of allotment of land to the Porwal Jain Samaj, Annexure-9 dt.25.6.2003 may kindly be quashed and set aside.

ii) by a writ, order or direction, the respondents be directed to allot the land in dispute to the petitioner-Society i.e. Sanadya Gaur Brahamin Samaj for the purpose of educational purposes and for Lord Shiva’s temple;

iii) any other order which your lordships may deem fit and proper in favour of petitioner may also be passed; and iv) Costs of writ petition be also awarded to the petitioner.”

Submissions by counsel for the petitioner:

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the President of Sanadhya Gaur Brahamin Samaj (hereinafter referred as ‘the petitioner-Society’) who applied for allotment of the land in question on 27.07.1985 before the Municipal Council, Sawai Madhopur (hereinafter referred as ‘the Council’) by way of submitting an application in the year 1985. Counsel submits that the application of the petitioner was considered and the Administrator of the Council made favourable recommendations for allotment of the land in favour of the Petitioner-Society. Counsel submits that the reports were summoned from the Town Planner and during pendency of the aforesaid process, the allotment order has been passed in favour of the respondent No.4 in utter violation of the provisions, contained under Rule 18 of the Rules of 1974. Counsel submits that as per the mandate, contained under Rule 18 of the Rules of 1974, any land can be allotted to the public and charitable institutions on payment of 50% of the sanctioned reserve price, but in the instant case, the land in question has been allotted to the respondent No.4 at the rate of 5% of the sanctioned reserve price. Counsel further submits that the application filed by the respondent No.4 was not even maintainable under Rule 18 of the Rules of 1974, as the respondent No.4, is neither public nor a charitable institution, rather it is a society, registered under the Rajasthan Societies Registration Act, 1958. Counsel submits that the application could have been submitted by the respondent No.4 under Rule 19 of the Rules of 1974. He further submitted that the respondent No.4 is also not entitled to get the allotment in terms of Rule 19(5) of the Rules of 1974, because no land can be allotted to such society who has acquired any land either by allotment