[2026:RJ-JD:5707-DB]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9331/2025

1. Nandlal Banjara S/o Bihari Lal, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Purani Basti, Kheraiya, Bhilwara, Rajasthan.

2. Gopal Banjara S/o Bhawana Banjara, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Maandol, Bhilwara, Rajasthan.

3. Chitar S/o Chhoga Ji, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Bheel Basti, Maandol, Bhopatpura, Bhilwara, Rajasthan.

4. Ramswaroop Meena S/o Dola Meena, Aged About 40 Years, Maandol, Bhopatpura, Bhilwara, Rajasthan.

----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Joint Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Secretariat, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur (Raj.).

2. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of Local Self Government, Secretariat, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur (Raj.).

3. The District Collector, District Bhilwara, Rajasthan.

4. The Tehsildar, Bijauliyaan, Bhilwara, Rajasthan.

5. The Sub Divisional Officer, Bijauliyaan, Bhilwara, Rajasthan.

6. The Executive Officer, Municipal Council Bijauliyaan, Bhilwara, Rajasthan.

7. The Gram Panchayat, Bhopatpura, Bhilwara, Rajasthan.

----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dinesh Kumar Godara For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajesh Panwar, Sr. Adv & AAG assisted by Mr. Ayush Gehlot HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP SHAH

Judgment

1. Date of conclusion of arguments 13.01.2026 2. Date on which judgment was reserved 13.01.2026

3. Whether the full judgment or only the operative part is pronounced: Full Judgment 4. Date of pronouncement 24.02.2026 Per Hon'ble Dr. Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J:

1. The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred assailing the inclusion of Village Maandol within the extended limits of Municipal Council, Bijauliya, pursuant to notifications dated 17.03.2025 and

27.03.2025 issued under the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 2009.

2. The principal grievance of the petitioners is that Village Maandol was not expressly named in the parent notification dated 18.09.2024 whereby certain adjoining Gram Panchayats were included within the municipal limits, and therefore its subsequent inclusion is without authority of law.

3. The petitioners have preferred the instant writ petition claiming the following reliefs:

“It is, therefore, humbly and respectfully prayed that this writ petition of the Petitioners may kindly be allowed:

A. By an appropriate order or direction, the notification dated 17.03.2025 (Ann 08) order dated 27.03.2025 (Ann 15) for the inclusion of village Maandol in the extension of limits of Municipal Council Bijauliyaan may be held illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional;

B. By an appropriate order or direction, the proceedings initiated in pursuance of order dated 18.09.2024 (Ann 1) qua village Maandol for the inclusion in Municipal Council, Bijauliyaan may be held illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional.

C. Writ Petition filed by the petitioners may kindly be allowed with costs.”

4. The brief facts of the present controversy are that by notification dated 18.09.2024, the State Government extended the limits of Bijauliya Municipal Council by adding four adjoining Gram Panchayats, namely, Bijoloya, Thadoda, Umajikheda and Laxmikheda, subject to the conditions of contiguity and non- prejudice to residents. Village Maandol was not mentioned in the said notification.

4.1. On 27.12.2024 and 30.12.2024, the Executive Officer initiated correspondence with the revenue authorities, sought land records, and indicated that public notices had been issued with no objections received. On 07.01.2025, a communication to the Rajasthan Land Records Modernization Society stated that Village Maandol, being part of Gram Panchayat Laxmikheda, would fall within the municipal limits upon mapping. This was followed by a letter dated 13.02.2025 to the SDO reiterating the same position.

4.2. Subsequently, by notification dated 17.03.2025, Village Maandol was formally included within the municipal limits. The District Collector, on 18.03.