Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2004 DIGILAW 1440 (RAJ)

Birda Ram v. Dalu Ram

2004-09-30

K.S.RATHORE

body2004
Honble RATHORE, J.—Heard learned counsel for the parties. (2). This writ petition is directed against the order dated 18.7.2002 passed by the Board of Revenue by which the Board of Revenue has set aside the mutation order passed by the Tehsildar dated 3.5.1960. (3). Learned counsel for the petitioner referred Annex.6, which has been passed by the SDO on the application submitted by Nathu Ram dated 22.3.1957 before the Asstt. Settlement Officer. Since Nathu Ram has died and legal heirs are not on the record, after serving a notice to the Tehsildar and on the basis of mutation opened by the Tehsildar vide order dated 3.5.1960 the order for correction in the record has been passed. Admittedly this order dated 31.1.1966 passed by the SDO is not challenged. The Board of Revenue has entertained this revision petition while exercising power u/s. 84 r/w Sec. 9 of the Land Revenue Act, 1956. Since as per the provisions of Sec. 15 of the Tenancy Act khatedari rights can not be given to the petitioner and thus khatedari rights cannot be accrued in favour of the petitioner u/s. 16 and land in question is a Government land and is used for public utility (Shamshan). Since Khatedari rights are not accrued u/s. 16, therefore, mutation order passed by the Tehsildar dated 3.9.1960 was set aside by the Board of Revenue. Whereas the order passed by the SDO, Sikar for correction in the record is still in force as it has not been challenged. (4). Having considered the rival submissions of the relevant provisions of law and material available on record, I am of the considered opinion that the matter should be remanded back to the Board of Revenue for fresh adjudication with the specific direction while passing the order on the revision petition shall also consider the order passed by the SDO dated 31.1.1966 and after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties shall pass the speaking order. (5). Consequently, the order dated 18.7.2002 is herewith quashed and set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Board of Revenue with the aforesaid observations. The petitioner is at liberty to move application for granting stay before the Board of Revenue. (6). In view of the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed of.