[2026:RJ-JD:12752]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2189/2026 Krishna Lal S/o Shri Hetram, Aged About 68 Years, Resident Of Narsinghpura, Tehsil Padampur, District Sri Ganganagar (Rajasthan). ----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary Revenue (Colonization) Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

2. Revenue Appellate Authority, Sri Ganganagar, Through P.o.

3. Sub Divisional Officer Cum Allotment Officer, Suratgarh, District Sri Ganganagar.

4. Tehsildar (Revenue), Suratgarh, Sri Ganganagar.

----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bhola Ram Chahar For Respondent(s) : -

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

Order

17/03/2026 By way of filing the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:-

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

1. The respondents may be directed to allot the land to the petitioner in pursuance to the order dated 14.05.1997 Avasted passed by the Revenue Appellate Authority, Sri Ganganagar in appeal No. 360/96. 2. Any other appropriate relief which this Hon'ble High Court deems just and proper may kindly be granted in favour of the petitioner.

3. The cost of the writ petition may kindly be awarded to the petitioner”

2. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court finds that 19 bighas of uncommand land allotted to the petitioner under the provisions of the Rajasthan Colonization (Allotment and Sale of Government Land in the Indira Gandhi Canal Colony Area) Rules, 1965, vide order dated 13.08.1985, was cancelled by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Suratgarh, on 06.07.1997 on the ground that it was a case of dual allotment of the same land to two persons.

3. Aggrieved by the order dated 06.07.1997, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the learned RAA, Sri Ganganagar, being Appeal No. 353/1996. The learned RAA, though vide order dated 14.05.1997 dismissed the said appeal, nevertheless, keeping in view the fact that the land allotted to the petitioner was cancelled due to dual allotment, directed the allotting authority to consider the case of the petitioner for fresh allotment of land in accordance with his eligibility.

4. The grievance of the petitioner is that, despite repeated representations and the specific direction issued by the learned RAA in Appeal No. 353/1996, the allotting authority, i.e., the Sub- Divisional Magistrate, Suratgarh, has not taken any decision in the matter, and till date, the issue regarding allotment of land to the petitioner in conformity with the aforesaid Rules of 1965 remains undecided.

5. This Court, in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, deems it just and proper to dispose of the present writ petition with a direction to the Sub-Divisional Officer/Tehsildar, Suratgarh, to consider and decide the grievance of the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of eight weeks from today.

6. In case the competent authority, i.e., the Sub-Divisional Officer/Tehsildar, Suratgarh, upon consideration of the matter, comes to the conclusion that the petitioner is not entitled to allotment of land as prayed for, it shall pass a reasoned and speaking order indicating the reasons thereof.

7. The stay petition and all pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

(KULDEEP MATHUR),J

68-divya/-