Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Scanned Judgements…!
Remedy against notices under Section 91 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956, and Section 22 of the Rajasthan Colonization Act, 1954, primarily involves filing a reply to the notices issued by authorities. Several cases show petitioners responding to notices under these provisions, asserting their possession and challenging the actions of authorities ["Trilok Singh VS State of Rajasthan through Colonization Secretary, Govt. of Rajasthan, Jaipur - 2017 0 Supreme(Raj) 992"], ["HANSHRAJ vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Rajasthan"], ["HANSHRAJ vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Rajasthan"], ["HANSHRAJ vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Rajasthan"], ["HANSHRAJ vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Rajasthan"], ["HANSHRAJ vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Rajasthan"].
Courts have emphasized that before initiating proceedings under these sections, authorities are required to follow due process, including issuing proper notices and giving petitioners an opportunity to respond. For instance, some judgments note that no prior notice was issued before 1999, and petitioners' immediate challenge indicates no undue delay in filing their petitions ["Trilok Singh VS State of Rajasthan through Colonization Secretary, Govt. of Rajasthan, Jaipur - 2017 0 Supreme(Raj) 992"].
The legal strategy often involves submitting replies to show possession and contest the notices' validity. Courts have also considered that actions taken without proper notices or in violation of prescribed procedures may be challenged successfully ["Trilok Singh VS State of Rajasthan through Colonization Secretary, Govt. of Rajasthan, Jaipur - 2017 0 Supreme(Raj) 992"], ["HANSHRAJ vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Rajasthan"].
Specific provisions, such as Section 7 of the Colonization Act, relate to auction notices and land procedures. Several judgments highlight that conditions like auction notices are governed by prescribed rules, and any deviation or misapplication can be grounds for remedy or reconsideration ["HANSHRAJ vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Rajasthan"], ["HANSHRAJ vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Rajasthan"], ["HANSHRAJ vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Rajasthan"], ["HANSHRAJ vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Rajasthan"], ["HANSHRAJ vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Rajasthan"], ["HANSHRAJ vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Rajasthan"], ["HANSHRAJ vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Rajasthan"], ["HANSHRAJ vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Rajasthan"], ["HANSHRAJ vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Rajasthan"], ["HANSHRAJ vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Rajasthan"].
Overall, the remedy against notices under Section 91 of the Land Revenue Act or Section 22 of the Colonization Act involves filing timely replies, asserting possession, and challenging procedural irregularities. Courts have recognized that proper notice and adherence to prescribed procedures are vital, and violations can be grounds for relief ["Trilok Singh VS State of Rajasthan through Colonization Secretary, Govt. of Rajasthan, Jaipur - 2017 0 Supreme(Raj) 992"], ["HANSHRAJ vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Rajasthan"].
References:- ["Trilok Singh VS State of Rajasthan through Colonization Secretary, Govt. of Rajasthan, Jaipur - 2017 0 Supreme(Raj) 992"]- ["HANSHRAJ vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Rajasthan"]- ["HANSHRAJ vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Rajasthan"]- ["HANSHRAJ vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Rajasthan"]- ["HANSHRAJ vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Rajasthan"]- ["HANSHRAJ vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Rajasthan"]- ["HANSHRAJ vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Rajasthan"]- ["HANSHRAJ vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Rajasthan"]- ["HANSHRAJ vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Rajasthan"]- ["HANSHRAJ vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Rajasthan"]- ["HANSHRAJ vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Rajasthan"]- ["HANSHRAJ vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Rajasthan"]- ["HANSHRAJ vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Rajasthan"]- ["HANSHRAJ vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Rajasthan"]- ["HANSHRAJ vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Rajasthan"]- ["HANSHRAJ vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Rajasthan"]
Landowners in Rajasthan often face notices under various revenue and colonization laws, sparking urgent questions about available remedies. A common query arises: what is the remedy against a notice under Section 91 of the Rajasthan Colonization Act, 1954? This post explores potential legal avenues, drawing from court judgments and legal analyses, to help you understand options like constitutional writs. Note that this is general information based on reviewed cases and should not be taken as specific legal advice—consult a qualified lawyer for your situation.
The Rajasthan Colonization Act, 1954, governs the colonization and administration of lands in notified colony areas, such as those under projects like the Indira Gandhi Nahar Pariyojna. It regulates allotment, sale, ejectment, and recovery actions to ensure proper land use and distribution. While Section 91 is not directly detailed in the reviewed documents for this Act, notices under it are typically linked to enforcement, recovery, or ejectment proceedings, often alongside provisions like Section 22 (ejectment/resumption) Trilok Singh VS State of Rajasthan through Colonization Secretary, Govt. of Rajasthan, Jaipur - 2017 0 Supreme(Raj) 992.
Related laws, such as the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 (Section 91), frequently intersect, addressing recovery of dues or coercive measures. For instance, multiple High Court cases reference notices under the Colonization Act combined with Section 91 of the Land Revenue Act HANSHRAJ vs STATE OF RAJASTHANJAGDISH vs THE STATE OF RAJASTHANMATU SINGH vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN.
No reviewed document provides a direct statutory remedy (e.g., appeal) specifically against a notice under Section 91 of the Colonization Act, 1954. However, a viable path emerges through constitutional writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, particularly for restraining coercive actions.
In a key case, petitioners filed a writ seeking restraint against actions under Section 22 of the Rajasthan Colonization Act, 1954, and/or Section 91 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956. They aimed to enforce a prior decree dated 03.12.1981 by the SDO, Jaisalmer, declaring gair khatedari rights over 30 Bigha 8 Biswa land. The petition requested: direction to the respondents to comply with the decree... and further a restrain against the respondents from taking action against the petitioners under Section 22 of the Rajasthan Colonization Act, 1954 ('the Colonisation Act') and/or under Section 91 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 Trilok Singh VS State of Rajasthan through Colonization Secretary, Govt. of Rajasthan, Jaipur - 2017 0 Supreme(Raj) 992. This illustrates writs (prohibition or mandamus) as a mechanism to halt notices ignoring established rights.
Several Rajasthan High Court orders highlight practical responses to similar notices:
Petitioners often file replies to notices under the Colonization Act, with matters pending before authorities. For example: Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in pursuance of the notice under Section 91 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 dated 19.09.2022 and Section... of the Colonization Act, 1954, the petitioner has filed reply to the said notice and the matter is... HANSHRAJ vs STATE OF RAJASTHANJAGDISH vs THE STATE OF RAJASTHANMATU SINGH vs STATE OF RAJASTHANDHARM DAS vs STATE OF RAJASTHANSHANKAR LAL vs THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN.
In another instance, a response was filed to a notice dated 11.02.2022 by the Commissioner Colonization, Rajasthan, Bikaner, under Section 91 of the Land Revenue Act SMT. SUMAN vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN.
These cases underscore that exhausting preliminary objections or replies strengthens subsequent writ petitions.
Other contexts involve recovery under Section 22 of the Colonization Act alongside Land Revenue provisions. District Collectors have directed recoveries, invoking Sections 89(7), 91 (Land Revenue), and 22 (Colonization) for dues like conversion charges for non-agricultural use (e.g., brick kilns) R. P. Bricks Industries VS State - 2013 Supreme(Raj) 164R. P. Bricks Industries VS State - 2013 Supreme(Raj) 165. Courts upheld such demands, but writs remain available for challenges.
Writs are not guaranteed and have constraints:- Prior Rights Required: Success often hinges on proven rights, like tenancy decrees. Unsupported claims may fail Trilok Singh VS State of Rajasthan through Colonization Secretary, Govt. of Rajasthan, Jaipur - 2017 0 Supreme(Raj) 992.- No Retrospective Validation: Amendments to related sections (e.g., Section 13 transfers) do not retroactively cure voids without permission Inder Singh (D) Thr. Lrs. VS Kehar Singh (D) Thr. Lrs. - 2017 Supreme(SC) 1540.- Laches and Delay: Prolonged inaction defeats claims, as seen in a writ dismissed for 13+ years' delay in pursuing allotment under Colonization Rules Billu Singh VS State of Rajasthan - 2014 Supreme(Raj) 836.- Fraudulent Transfers: Authorities may cancel allotments and resume land, with Board of Revenue upholding such via Article 227 review Lilu Ram son of Shri Mam Chand VS Board of Revenue for Rajasthan at Ajmer - 2016 Supreme(Raj) 1465.
Additionally, historical notifications applied the Act to specific villages post-1954, affecting tenancy claims Jugal Kishore VS State of Rajasthan - 1973 Supreme(Raj) 15Ram Pratap VS Lrs. of Mansukhram - 2007 Supreme(Raj) 1026.
If facing a Section 91 notice:1. Respond Promptly: File a reply or objection with the issuing authority, as petitioners did in multiple cases HANSHRAJ vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN.2. Gather Evidence: Collect property records, prior decrees, and proof of rights (e.g., khatedari).3. Approach High Court: File Article 226 writ for interim stay, citing non-compliance with laws or rights violations Trilok Singh VS State of Rajasthan through Colonization Secretary, Govt. of Rajasthan, Jaipur - 2017 0 Supreme(Raj) 992.4. Consult Revenue Courts: Explore tenancy defenses under Rajasthan Tenancy Act before escalation.5. Seek Local Expertise: Revenue hierarchies (Tehsildar, Collector, Board of Revenue) handle initial stages.
Land disputes in Rajasthan's colony areas demand swift, informed action. While writs offer relief, outcomes vary. For personalized guidance, engage a local advocate specializing in revenue laws. Stay informed on notifications and amendments to protect your interests.
#RajasthanLandLaw, #ColonizationActRemedy, #WritPetition
Rajasthan Colonization Act, 1954 - Section 22 - Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 - Section 91 - Rajasthan ... 91 of the Land Revenue Act - Petition allowed partly ... No.4, the respondent-authorities would not take any action against the petitioners under Section 22 of the Colonization Act and Section ... Colonization Act, 1954 ('the Colonisation Act') and/or under Section 91 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 ('the Land Revenue Act'). ... .......
22 of the Colonization Act, 1954, the petitioner has filed reply to the said notice and the matter is Section 91 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 dated 19.09.2022 and Section ... The respondent authorities have issued a notice under order or direction:- Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in pursuance of the notice
22 of the Colonization Act, 1954, the petitioner has filed reply to the said notice and the matter is Section 91 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 dated 19.09.2022 and Section ... The respondent authorities have issued a notice under order or direction:- Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in pursuance of the notice
22 of the Colonization Act, 1954, the petitioner has filed reply to the said notice and the matter is Section 91 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 dated 19.09.2022 and Section ... The respondent authorities have issued a notice under order or direction:- Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in pursuance of the notice
22 of the Colonization Act, 1954, the petitioner has filed reply to the said notice and the matter is Section 91 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 dated 19.09.2022 and Section ... The respondent authorities have issued a notice under order or direction:- Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in pursuance of the notice
22 of the Colonization Act, 1954, the petitioner has filed reply to the said notice and the matter is Section 91 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 dated 19.09.2022 and Section ... The respondent authorities have issued a notice under order or direction:- Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in pursuance of the notice
dated 11.02.2022 (Annexure-6) issued by it under Section 91 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 (hereinafter to be Section 91 of the Act of 1956 and thereafter to decide the The Commissioner Colonization, Rajasthan, Bikaner. ... Colonization Commissioner, Rajasthan Canal dated 11.03.2022 (Annexure-7) filed by the petitioner in response to the notice
Under the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Resumption of Jagirs Act (Act VI of 1952) these Jagirs were resumed on 1-7-1954, and 15-8-1954 respectively. ... By a notification of the 10th May, 1956 published in Part I (Kha) of the Rajasthan Gazette dated July 14, 1956 Rajasthan Colonization Act, 1954 was applied to the villages where the appellants lands are situate. This Notification is No. F(513) Rev. (B)/55 dated 10-5-1956. ... Sec. 181 provides for application and notice for ejectment and sec. 182 provides ....
Bux (supra), the District Collector has passed the impugned order whereby he has directed the Tehsildar to recover a sum of Rs.6,93,334/- and Rs.6,79,467/- and further directed that if any case is made out under Section 89 (7) and 91 of the Land Revenue Act and under Section 22 of the Colonization Act ... AIR 1993 Raj. 21, wherein several conditions including conditions no. 6, 7, 9, 10, 11 and 12 of the Rajasthan Colonization Project Are Brick Kiln (Leases) Conditions, 1966 have been declared ultra vire....
Bux (supra), the District Collector has passed the impugned order whereby he has directed the Tehsildar to recover a sum of Rs.6,93,334/- and Rs.6,79,467/- and further directed that if any case is made out under Section 89 (7) and 91 of the Land Revenue Act and under Section 22 of the Colonization Act ... AIR 1993 Raj. 21, wherein several conditions including conditions no. 6, 7, 9, 10, 11 and 12 of the Rajasthan Colonization Project Are Brick Kiln (Leases) Conditions, 1966 have been declared ultra vire....
It is submitted that, as submitted hereinabove, the main thrust of the case of the respondent-original plaintiff until then was that the transaction was not in compliance of Section 13 of the Rajasthan Colonization Act, 1954. It is submitted that therefore the sale-deed is in violation of Section 13 of the Rajasthan Colonization Act, 1954. It is submitted that only after the decision of the Board of Revenue, the respondent-original plaintiff shifted the focus to Section 42 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955. In that view of the matter, no order of compounding in f....
In case the property was transferred without permission of State Government by any of the modes, the said provision provided that it shall be void. 2. The only question raised in this appeal is with respect to the effect of amendment of Section 13 of the Rajasthan Colonization Act, 1954 (for short, "the Act of 1954"). Prior to the amendment, permission of State Government was required, as per provisions contained in Section 13 of the Act of 1954 to transfer any property rights which were held by a non-khatedar, by way of will, sale, mortgage, exchange, gift etc.
The respondents No. 4 to 7 deposited the remaining amount and patta of the land was issued in their name. Thereafter, the petitioner preferred an application under Section 11 r/w Section 14 of the Rajasthan Colonization Act, 1954 ("the Act") before the District Collector, Sri Ganganagar for cancellation of the allotment. The application was allowed by the District Collector vide order dated 28.12.77 and the allotment made in favour of the respondents No. 4 to 7 was cancelled and the possession of the land was directed to be handed over to the petitioner herein. Aggrieved th....
2. For claiming reliefs mentioned to supra, it is inter-alia averred in the petition that the State Government enacted Rajasthan Colonization Act, 1954 (for short, 'Act of 1954') to facilitate better provision for the colonization and administration of lands in the colony areas notified under the provisions. For allotment and sale of land around Indira Gandhi Canal, the State Government framed the Rajasthan Colonization (Allotment and Sale of Government Land in Indira Gandhi Nahar Pariyojna) Rules 1975 (for short, 'Rules of 1975'). Under the Rules of 1975, there are certain....
24.12.1955 under the provisions of the Rajasthan Colonization Act of 1954 i.e., after 15.10.1955. The area of village Phephana became Colony area vide the Notification dt. In these circumstances, even the argument of the learned counsel for the appellant regarding retrospective effect to the Notification dt. 24.10.1955 declaring village Phephana to be an area of falling in Bhakra Project, need not to be dealt with.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
