[2025:RJ-JP:36645]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16105/2018 Jitendra Singh S/o Shri Laxman Singh, Aged About 42 Years, By Caste Rajput, R/o Sultana, Tehsil Chirawa, District Jhunjhunu ----Petitioner Versus

1. Additional District Collector, Jhunjhunu

2. Chairman, Shankardas Ji Dungarsidas Charitable Trust, Sultana, Tehsil Chirawa, District Jhunjhunu

3. Secretary, Shankardas Ji Dungarsidas Charitable Trust, Sultana, Tehsil Chirawa, District Jhunjhunu

4. Uttam Agarwal S/o Shri Devkinandan, By Castte Mahajan, R/o Sultana Panchayat Samiti, Chirawa District Jhunjhunu

5. Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Sultana, Panchayat Samiti Chirawa District Jhunjhunu

6. Secretary, Gram Panchayat Sultana, Panchayat Samiti Chirawa District Jhunjhunu

7. Land Record Officer, Tehsil Chirawa, District Jhunjhunu ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Arun Singh Shekhawat For Respondent(s) : Mr. Surendra Singh Mr. Omveer Singh Saini Mr. Umesh Choudhary for Mr. V.D. Gathala, AGC JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

Order

10/09/2025

1. By way of filing this writ petition, a challenge has been made to the impugned order dated 22.05.2018 passed by the Additional District Collector, Jhunjhunu, by which the revision petition filed along with the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act assailing the validity of the patta dated 30.03.1999, has been rejected on the ground of delay in filing the revision petition.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the patta of a gair mumkin kua land was allotted in favour of the respondent No.4 by the Gram Panchayat contrary to the rules and this fact was enquired by the Panchayat Samiti, Chirawa and a report was submitted in this regard on 04.10.2017 and it was found that the patta was not issued as per the provisions of law. Counsel submits that being aresident of the area and vicinity, the petitioner assailed the aforesaid patta before the Revisional Court by way of filing revision petition along with an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay in filing the revision petition. Counsel submits the reasons of delay were explained in the application submitted by the petitioner under Section 5 of the Limiation Act, but those reasons were not considered and the application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act was rejected. The revisional authority was supposed to decide the revision petition on its merits and demerits, but instead of doing so, the same has been rejected on the ground of delay, hence, interference of this Court is warranted.

3. Per contra, learned counsels for the respondents opposed the arguments raised by counsel for the petitioner, but they are not in a position to controvert the above submission made by counsel for the petitioner.

4. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on the record.

5. Perusal of the record indicates that a patta of the subject land was issued by the Panchayat in favour of the respondent No.4 in the year 1999. It appears that some enquiry was conducted with regard to the aforesaid patta by the Panchayat Samiti, Chirawa and a conclusion was drawn that the patta was issued in contravention to the provisions of law. On the basis of the aforesaid, the petitioner submitted a revision petition assailing the validity of the patta before the Court of Additional District Collector, Jhunjhunu along with an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay in filing the revision petition. Instead of deciding the revision petition on its merits, the revisional Court has rejected the application submitted by the petitioner under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.

6. In the considered opinion of this Court, the reasons of delay were well explained by the petitioner in the application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, hence, the order impugned passed by the Revisional Court is not sustainable and is liable to be and is hereby quashed & se