HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8655/2021

1.

Rajasthan State Industrial Development And Investment

Corporation Limited (Riico), District Industrial Centre,

Moti Dungri Road, Alwar (Rajasthan), Through Senior

Regional Manager, Riico Limited, Riico, District Industrial

Centre, Moti Dungri Road, Alwar (Rajasthan).

2.

Rajasthan State Industrial Development And Investment

Corporation Limited (Riico), District Industrial Centre,

Moti Dungri Road, Alwar (Rajasthan), Through Assistant

Regional Manager, Riico Limited, Riico, District Industrial

Centre, Moti Dungri Road, Alwar (Rajasthan)

----Petitioners

Versus

1.

Sanjay Kumar S/o Mahaveer Prasad, Aged About 52

Years, Resident Of D-151, East Of Kailash, Delhi.

2.

Tanya Saini, Aged About 25 Years, D/o Sanjay Kumar

Saini

3.

Harshita Saini, Aged About 23 Years, D/o Sanjay Kumar

Saini

4.

Pravan Saini, Aged About 22 Years, S/o Sanjay Kumar

Saini

5.

Vrinda Saini D/o Sanjay Kumar Saini, Aged About 21

Years, All Residents Of D-151, East Of Kailash, Delhi

Through Power Of Attorney Holder Sanjay Kumar S/o

Mahaveer Prasad, Resident Of D-151, East Of Kailash,

Delhi.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mr. Ajeet Kumar Bhandari

For Respondent(s)

:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA

Order

13/08/2021

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners at length.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has assailed the order

passed in T.I. Application by the learned Additional District Judge

No.3 Alwar whereby the appeal has been allowed and the

petitioners have been exempted not to allot the said disputed plot

to any third person till disposal of the main suit. Learned counsel

(2 of 2)

[CW-8655/2021]

submits that the rules provided for an appeal and the suit ought

not to have been entertained.

This Court finds that the learned Additional District Judge has

gone into details and noticed that the petitioners have asserted

that they have canceled the allotment in 2016 whereas in

01.06.2017 a letter was issued in favour of the plaintiffs asking

them to produce all documents and complete the formalities for

making the name transfer of Sanjay Kumar in place of the

deceased who expired on 17.12.2013. In view thereof, the

cancellation itself appears to be doubtful.

Keeping in view thereof, the Court has reached to the

conclusion prima facie case in favour of the plaintiffs has allowed

the appeal. Factual aspects need not be interfered with settled

law. The opinion arrived at by the Courts below need not be

interfered with in writ jurisdiction under Article 227 of the

Constitution of India in the matters relating to T.I. application.

In view thereof, the writ is found to be devoid of merits and

the same is accordingly dismissed. However, the petitioner would

be always free to get the suit itself decided expeditiously.

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J

Arun/52