HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 753/2025 Birma Ram S/o Shri Ranchod Ram, Aged About 69 Years, R/o Barra Ki Dhani, Salawas Road, Sangaria, Tehsil Kudi, District Jodhpur (Adhar Card No. 2909-9045-0917).

----Petitioner Versus

1. Jodhpur Development Authority (Jda), Jodhpur Through Its Secretary.

2. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Revenue Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

3. Director, Department Of Local Self And Urban Development Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

4. District Collector, Jodhpur.

5. Tehsildar, Tehsil Kudi, District Jodhpur.

6. Jodhpur Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Limited, Through Its Secretary, Jodhpur Discom, New Power House Road, Jodhpur, Rajasthan.

7. Deputy Commissioner Zone-3Rd, Jodhpur Development Authority, Jodhpur.

8. Assistant Town Planner, Jodhpur Development Authority, Jodhpur.

9. Chief Medical And Health Officer, Jodhpur (Rural), Jodhpur ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Moti Singh For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Rajpurohit, AAG with Ms. Aditi Sharma Mr. Ayush Gehlot, AAAG

Order

19/01/2026

1. The matter comes up on an application (inward no.01/2026) filed on behalf of the respondents no.1, 7, 8 under Article 226(3) of the Constitution of India for vacation of interim order dated

06.11.2025.

2. Mr. Ayush Gehlot, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-State, has tried to persuade this Court that the area in question was never actually a functional catchment area, as repeated reports of Government Offices have indicated that the pond and its catchment area were not operational at the relevant time. He further submits that once the nature of the land undergoes a change, it is permissible for the State to alter the nomenclature and usage of the land. He contends that the present dispute relates to a matter which is nearly 35 years old and therefore, even if the land was originally a catchment area / Aghore land, the challenge cannot be entertained at this belated stage as third-party rights may have been created. He also submits that the Master Plan prescribes mixed land use for the area in question.

3. Learned counsel further submits that Section 92 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 does not restrict conversion of a catchment area into abadi land and Section 48 of the JDA Act empowers the JDA to convert such catchment area land into abadi land. He submits that the JDA is entitled to use the land falling within its peripherial limits.

4. Learned counsel has referred the judgment rendered by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of R & M Trust Vs. Koramangala Residents Vigilance Group & Ors, reported in (2005) 3 Supreme Court Cases 91; State of Rajasthan & Anr. Vs.

Ultratech Cement Limited reported in (2022) 19 Supreme Court Cases 102.

5. This Court is not convinced by the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the respondents. Once the land has been classified as gair mumkin aghore /catchment area, merely stating that its nature has changed is not sufficient to justify de- notification or change of land use without following due process of law.

6. In view of the above, the application (Inward No.01/2026) is dismissed.

7. The matter requires detailed consideration, which can be done only at the time of final hearing.

8. List the matter after eight weeks.

(SANDEEP SHAH),J (DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J

89-Sudheer/-