A writ petition seeking enforcement of a statutory eviction order may be declined if the affected parties are not impleaded, provided the petitioner remains free to pursue appropriate legal remedies for enforcement.

Order

1. This intra court appeal is directed against order dated 3.11.20 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court, whereby the writ petition preferred by the appellant seeking directions to Tehsildar, Gira, District Barmer to execute the orders dated 28.7.20 and 29.7.20 passed in the proceedings under Section 91 of Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 (‘the Act of 1956’), has been dismissed.

2. Precisely, the case set out by the appellant before the learned Single Judge was that vide orders dated 28.7.20 and 29.7.20, the Tehsildar, Gira, issued directions to remove the encroachment made on the oran land, the details whereof are set out in para no.6 of the writ petition, however, the said orders are not being executed.

3. The learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition observing that the order passed by the Tehsildar, Gira is not final inasmuch as, the aggrieved persons have a right to file appeal before the Appellate Authority and they can also avail further remedy available to them. That apart, the court observed that the persons sought to be evicted pursuant to the order passed as aforesaid are not impleaded as party respondents to the writ petition.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that since the appellant was seeking enforcement of the order passed by the statutory authority in the proceedings concluded under Section 91 of the Act of 1956, the persons against whom the order was passed, were not required to be impleaded as party respondents in the matter. In this regard, learned counsel relied upon a Single Judge decision dated 28.8.18 passed in S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.5393/18- Rajmata Ji Sthan Deh vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors., against which the special appeal filed was dismissed by a Bench of this Court vide order dated 19.11.18. Learned counsel urged that subject to any order which may be passed by the Appellate Authority, the order can be directed to be enforced by this Court and therefore, the dismissal of the writ petition by the learned Single Judge is not justified.

5. It is noticed that in Rajmata Ji Sthan Deh’s case (supra), the learned Single Judge of this Court issued directions to implement the order passed by Tehsildar, Asind without prejudice to any contrary order passed by a superior court. Aggrieved by the said order, the special appeal preferred by the persons affected, who were not impleaded as party respondents in the writ petition, was dismissed by a Bench of this Court observing that the directions are issued by the learned Single Judge for implementation of the order passed by Tehsildar, Asind subject to contrary order if any passed by a superior court and therefore, the appellants are not precluded from questioning the legality of the order passed by Tehsildar by availing the appropriate remedy available to them under the law.

6. In the considered opinion of this Court, if the order passed by the Tehsildar has attained finality and the same is not implemented, nothing prevented the appellant from approaching the higher authorities for implementation of the order of eviction passed as aforesaid. Obviously, if there exists any encroachment over the land forming part of oran, the same has to be removed by the State authorities in accordance with law. But, the order impugned passed by the learned Single Judge declining to issue the directions as prayed for in absence of the persons affected being before the Court, does not warrant any interference by us in exercise of intra court appeal jurisdiction.

7. The appeal is therefore, dismissed. It is made clear that the dismissal of the writ petiti