Advocates:
['SANJAY MEHRISH', 'ASGAR KHAN', 'MOHAMMED ZUBEIR', 'AKSHAY SHARMA']

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 20682/2019

Sundar S/o Ratanlal, Aged About 42 Years, Resident Of Naugaon

Tehsil Kaman, District Bharatpur (Rajasthan)

----Petitioner

Versus

1.

Smt Sulakshana Devi W/o Bhagwan Singh, Resident Of

Naugaon Tehsil Kaman, District Bharatpur (Rajasthan),

Through Special Power Of Attorney- Aurang S/o Saurav,

Resident Of Naugayan Tehsil Kaman, District Bharatpur.

2.

State Of Rajasthan, Through Tehsildar, Kaman, District

Bharatpur (Rajasthan)

----Non-Petitioners

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mr. Sanjay Mehrish

For Respondent(s)

:

Mr. Kuldeep Sharma, for

Mr. Akshay Sharma, AGC

Mr. Mohammed Zubeir, for

Mr. Asgar Khan

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL

Order

29/01/2021

The petitioner, who is a member of Scheduled Caste, has

filed this writ petition stating therein that he purchased two

parcels of land comprising of Khasra No.335/0.23 hectare and

Khasra No.336/0.27 hectare vide registered sale deed dated

27.12.2010 from the respondent No.1, also a member of

Scheduled Caste. Thereafter, he filed a suit under Sections 88, 89

and 188 Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 which came to be decided

by the Court of Sub-Divisional Officer, Kaman, District Bharatpur

vide judgment and decree dated 30.06.2015 (Annexure-1). He

submitted that the first appeal preferred by the respondent No.1

(2 of 5)

[CW-20682/2019]

against the judgment and decree dated 30.06.2015 was allowed

by the Revenue Appellate Authority, Bharatpur vide judgment

dated 25.09.2017 (Annexure-2) relying on the clarification circular

dated 11.02.2019 issued by the Government of Rajasthan in the

Department of Revenue. He averred that the second appeal

preferred by him was dismissed by the Board of Revenue Ajmer,

Rajasthan vide judgment dated 07.11.2019 (Annexure-3).

Assailing the judgment as well as the clarification

circular/letter dated 11.02.2009, learned counsel for the petitioner

contended that Section 42-B of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955

(for short, ‘The Act of 1955’) puts no bar on purchase of the

property by a member of Scheduled Caste not resident of

Rajasthan. He contended that by way of administrative order, the

statutory provisions cannot be altered/amended. He, therefore,

prays for quashing the impugned judgment and decree dated

07.11.2019 passed by Board of Revenue Ajmer, Rajasthan as well

as for a direction to the respondents to enter the mutation of the

land in question in his favour.

Per contra, Mr. Kuldeep Sharma, learned counsel for Mr.

Akshay Sharma, learned Additional Government Counsel,

submitted that vide clarification circular/letter dated 11.02.2009,

keeping in view the interest of the residents of Rajasthan, it was

decided to restrain the persons not residents of Rajasthan from

purchasing the land belonging to the members of Scheduled

Castes/Scheduled Tribes.

Mr. Mohammed Zubeir, learned counsel for Mr. Asgar Khan,

learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1 supported the

judgment passed by the Board of Revenue based on the

clarification circular dated 11.02.2009.

(3 of 5)

[CW-20682/2019]

Learned counsel for the respondents relied on the judgment

of the Hon’ble Apex Court of India in cases of Bhagwan Dass

and ors. Vs. Kamal Abrol and ors.: (2005) 11 SCC 66 as well

as Union of India (UOI) and ors. Vs. Dudh Nath Prasad: AIR

2000 SC 525 in support of their contention.

Heard the learned counsels for the parties and perused the

record.

Section 42-B of the Act of 1955 reads as under:

“42-B. Declaration as valid of sale, gift and

bequest— Where any sale, gift or holding before

the commencement of the Rajasthan Tenancy

(Second Amendment) Act, 1992 Act No. 22 of

1992 was void on account of contravention of any

of the provisions of clause (a) of section 42, as it

stood before the said amendment Act of 1992,

such sale, gift or bequest may be decla