The court emphasized that allotment of agricultural land must fulfill the purpose of cultivation, permitting exchange when initial allotment is uncultivable.

07/03/2024

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Briefly noted the facts in the present case are that the petitioner being landless agriculturist was in possession of land measuring 38 bighas but he was not aware of the khasra number of his land which is in his possession. While the petitioner was in possession of the subject piece of land, he preferred an application for regularization of the land by way of allotment. The petitioner’s application for regularization/allotment of land was considered and he was allotted a land measuring 38 bighas. The allotment of the land was made to the petitioner in the year 1977 and the land was mutated in his favour in Khasra No.134/269. After marking of the (Downloaded on 12/03/2024 at 04:37:09 AM) (2 of 10) khasras in the area concerned, the petitioner came to know that the land, which is actually in his possession, is not the same land which has been mentioned in the allotment order and the land which has been allotted to him falls in Khasra No.134/269 and is slightly away from the land which is in his possesion. The land of the petitioner was demarcated as a land of Khasra No.173 of Village Bhojasar. The petitioner applied for regularization of the land under his possession situated in Khasra No.173 Village Bhojasar. Since the land which is in possession of the petitioner falling in Khasra No.173 was not allotted to the petitioner, therefore, notices under Section 91 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act , 1956 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act of 1956’) were issued by Tehsildar, Jaisalmer. In these circumstances, the petitioner approached the respondents with a prayer that the land which was allotted to him in the year 1977, falls in Khasra No.134/269 whereas the land which is actually in his possession falls in Khasra No.173, thus, the land which is actually in his possession may be allotted to him by resorting the provisions relating to the exchange of land. The application preferred by the petitioner was recommended by the Gram Panchayat, Hameera vide Resolution No.3 in its Special Gram Sabha dated 07.11.2017. Thereafter, the Tehsildar Jaisalmer vide his letter dated 27.03.2018, also gave ‘No Objection’ with respect to the exchange of land from Khasra No.134/269 to Khasra No. 173.

3. When the request of the petitioner was not acceded to, he preferred an application on 05.03.2019 (Annex.10) to the District Collector for exchange of the land. On the application so preferred by the petitioner, the matter was got enquired and a factual (Downloaded on 12/03/2024 at 04:37:09 AM) (3 of 10) report was submitted by the Sub Divisional Officer, Jaisalmer.

Thereafter, the District Collector, Jaisalmer vide letter dated 29.06.2020 directed the Sub Divisional Officer, Jaisalmer to personally visit the site and submit a report regarding feasibility of exchange. The Sub Divisional Officer, Jaisalmer, after visiting the site, submitted his report dated 15.07.2021 stating that the land which was actually allotted to the petitioner in Khasra No.134/269 is not feasible for agricultural purposes and in exchange, the petitioner may be allotted land from Khasra No.173 as he is in possession of that land. Despite the matter having been duly enquired into and positive report having been submitted to the Collector, Jaisalmer, the application of the petitioner for exchange of the land has been rejected vide order dated 01.09.2021 (Annex.15) by the Designated Officer (Revenue) Collector, Jaisalmer. Aggrieved of the order dated 01.09.2021, the present writ petition has