Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2005 DIGILAW 2991 (RAJ)

Sumer Singh v. State of Rajasthan

2005-11-16

PREM SHANKAR ASOPA

body2005
Judgment Prem Shanker Asopa, J.-Since, the common question of law and fact is involved in this bunch of writ petitions, therefore, all these petitions are being decided by one common order. 2. The facts of one of the writ petition Sumer Singh are taken as leading case. The writ petition is directed against the order 29.06.2002 (Annexure 4) passed by the Court of Additional Collector (Third), Jaipur, whereby the revision petition filed by the Panchayat Samiti, Jhotwara district Jaipur, against the order dated 112.1999, cancelling Resolution No. 4 passed by Gram Panchayat Kalwar whereby it was resolved to issue Patta to the petitioners, has been accepted. 3. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the revision petition is not maintainable as the order of Gram Panchayat is appealable but no such appeal has been filed. 4. The further submission is that the said Pattas were granted by the Gram Panchayat as per rule after issuing notice and inspection by the panch. 5. The Counsel for the respondents submitted that the order of the Additional Collector is legal and justified as there was violation of Rules 142, 143, 145 and 146 of the Rajasthan Panchayat Raj Rules of not holding the auction and further not inspecting the site. Therefore, the issuance of Patta is illegal. The further submission was made before the Collector by the respondents that the Sarpanch in order to give undue advantage to his family members has issue the pattas in violation of the rules. 6. The Counsel for the petitioner has filed an affidavit as Annexure 5 in this writ petition which was filed before the Additional Collector, wherein in Para No. 3 it was submitted that the petitioner is not related to the Sarpanch and is of different caste also but the said affidavit has been ignored by the Additional Collector while allowing the aforesaid revision petition. 7. After considering the submissions, I am of the view that the Additional Collector (Third) has committed an illegality in not considering the said affidavit and passing the Judgment on the basis of relations of Sarpanch, which is not there. As regards violation of Rules, no reference of violation of specific rule has been made. The operative part of the order is reproduced as under: 8. In my view the issue is required to be re-examined afresh. 9. As regards violation of Rules, no reference of violation of specific rule has been made. The operative part of the order is reproduced as under: 8. In my view the issue is required to be re-examined afresh. 9. Consequently, I allow the writ petition, quash and set-aside the order dated 29.06.2002 passed by the Additional Collector (Third), Jaipur and remand the matter back to the Additional Collector (III), Jaipur, for deciding the issue afresh including the violation of law on which the specific finding of any illegality committed by the Gram Panchayat be given.