HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 21000/2019

M/s Singhal Industries, Through Sole Proprietor Sh. Pradeep

Singhal, S/o Sh. S.l. Singhal, Age- 60 Yrs. R/o 3/110-

Vidhyadhar Nagar.

----Petitioner

Versus

1.

Senior Regional Manager - Riico, Riico, Road No. 5, Vkia

Area, Jaipur, Rajasthan 302013

2.

Rajasthan State Industrial Development And Investment

Corporation Limited (Riico), Through Managing Director,

Udyog Bhawan, Tilak Marg, Jaipur, Rajasthan 302005.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mr. Ajatshatru Mina, through V.C.

For Respondent(s)

:

Mr. Ankit Totuka, through V.C.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH

Order

09/12/2020

Heard counsel for the parties.

Counsel for the petitioner submitted that against the

cancellation order dated 20^th November, 2019 (Annexure-A-2), the

petitioner has filed an appeal before the Managing Director under

the RIICO Disposal of Land Rules, 1979, which is still pending.

Counsel further submits that without deciding the appeal, the

respondents are going to allot the land in dispute to some other

person.

This court while issuing notices to the respondents on

10.12.2019 passed the following order:-

“Learned counsel submits that the land in

question was allotted to the petitioner for

(2 of 3)

[CW-21000/2019]

industrial purposes. Learned counsel submitted

that weigh bridge is an activity, which is permitted

under the RIICO Disposal of Land Rules, 1979,

where change in the land rules is permissible by

charging certain amount.

Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner had

to approach the Civil Court and the Civil Court, by

the order dated 8th October, 2018, allowed the

appeal of the petitioner and restrained the RIICO

from taking any action against the petitioner

without following the due procedure of law and

further, no action was to be taken for taking

forceful

possession

without

considering

regularisation.

Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner has

also approached the Authorities for regularisation

of the land on various occasions.

Learned counsel submitted that without

considering the regularisation of land in question,

the impugned order dated 20thy November, 2019

has been passed, whereby the lease/allotment in

favour of the petitioner has been cancelled.

Issue notice of the writ petition as well as stay

application, returnable on 13^th January, 2020.

Notices be given ‘dasti’, if prayed.

In the meanwhile, no coercive action shall be

taken against the petitioner in pursuance of the

order dated 20^th November, 2019 (Annexure-2 in

the writ petition).”

Counsel for the petitioner further submits that the

respondents be directed to decide the pending appeal and till

disposal of the appeal, the interim order passed by this Court

dated 10.12.2019 may be continued.

Mr. Ankit Totuka, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

respondents has not raised serious objection to the submissions

made by counsel for the petitioner.

In that view of the matter, the Managing Director-respondent

No.2 is directed to decide the appeal filed by the petitioner against

the order dated 20^th November, 2019 (Annexure-A-2), after

hearing both the parties within a period of one month from today

(3 of 3)

[CW-21000/2019]

and till disposal of the appeal, the interim order dated 10.12.2019

passed by this Court shall continue.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

(INDERJEET SINGH),J

Upendra/38