JUDGMENT 1. - In all these writ petitions similar questions of law and facts are involved, thus are being decided by this common judgment. Brief facts of the Writ Petition No. 7520/2004 (Prabhu Lal v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.) are taken as leading case. 2. The case of the petitioners is that as per circular dated 14.5.2003 issued by the Director, Panchayat Raj Department Rajasthan Jaipur under which employed educated, helpless, widows, divorce's, women, handicapped, ex-man and dependent of Ex.-man (Army Personnel) for Rural areas in the scheme of 'Mukhyamantri Rojgar Yojna' the Kiyoshak are to be allotted as per the guidelines mentioned in the Circular. 3. In pursuance to the aforesaid circular, the respondent No. 5 -Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat - Dug, Panchayat Samiti - Dug, District : Jhalawar hold meeting on 18.2.2004 for implementation of the scheme of the year 2003-04. A Committee has been constituted in the Chairmanship of Sarpanch, Member of Zila Parishad, Member of Panchayat Samiti, Ward Panch and Secretary of Gram Panchayat - Dug for allotment of Kiyoshak/shops. 4. In the general meeting held on 20.4.2004 the Gram Sabha of village - Dug has given approval of 28 Kiyoshak/shops to be allotted to the petitioners in village - Dug. 5. After approval and sanction of 28 shops/Kiyoshak in village - Dug, the Panchayat Samiti called a meeting of Administration Permanent Committee for selection of 28 suitable candidates as per Circular and in the scheme of 'Mukhyamantri Rojgar Yojna'. The Selection Committee in its meeting has allotted the shops/Kiyoshak to the petitioners considering them eligible to get the same as per scheme and Circular. 6. After allotment of the shops/Kiyoshak for approval the matter was sent to the Panchayat Samiti. The respondent No. 2 - Director, Panchayati Raj Department, Rajasthan Jaipur vide its letter dated 21.7.2004 directed the respondent No. 3 - Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Jhalawar that sanction for 28 commercial plots is not possible on the Panchayat Samiti's land and approval was declined. 7. Upon receipt of the letter dated 21.7.2004, the respondent No. 4 Vikas Adhikari, Panchayat Samiti - Dug issued a notice to the petitioners on 15.10.2004 with a direction that till the decision of the approval is not given, the petitioner shall not raise any construction on the allotted land. Ultimately, the allotment rhade by the Gram Panchayat declared. 7. Upon receipt of the letter dated 21.7.2004, the respondent No. 4 Vikas Adhikari, Panchayat Samiti - Dug issued a notice to the petitioners on 15.10.2004 with a direction that till the decision of the approval is not given, the petitioner shall not raise any construction on the allotted land. Ultimately, the allotment rhade by the Gram Panchayat declared. void-ab-initio and the respondent No. 4 lodged a F.I.R. No. 118/2004 on 15.10.2004 at Police Station - Dug against the petitioners on the ground that the petitioners unauthorizedly occupied the Government land and are trespasser. 8. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order dated 21.7.2004, 7.10.2004 and 15.10.2004, the petitioners filed these writ petitions on the ground that before cancellation of the allotment made in their favour, no enquiry or opportunity of being heard was provided to the petitioners. Therefore, the order impugned passed by the respondents are contrary to the principles of natural justice. 9. It is also contended that the allotment, which has been made strictly in accordance with the Circular dated 11.5.2003 issued by the respondents. The respondents have cancelled the allotment only on the ground that the allotment made in favour of the petitioners on the Panchayat Samiti's land and Gram Panchayat has no jurisdiction to allot the same. 10. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of State has categorically stated that the Principal Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department has issued a letter dated 14.5.2003 to the District Collectors, C.E.Os. and Zila Parishad, it was necessary that before allotment of Kiyoshak under the 'Mukhyamantri Rojgar Yojna' an advertisement should have to be given in the local newspaper but the same was not given in the instant case. The Gram Sabha passed resolution for allotment of land, which was in the ownership of Panchayat Samiti and does not belong to Gram Panchayat Dug, therefore, the allotment of the plots was against the provisions of Panchayat Raj Rules. 11. It is also contended that the Selection Committee constituted is contrary to the rules and land, which has been allotted by the committee is contrary to the rules because according to the rules priority was to be given to the unemployed educated youths and below poverty line family but the same was not done. 12. The sancton of 28 commercial plots made by the Gram Panchayat on Panchayat Samiti's land is not possible, therefore, the allotment itself is void-ab-initio. 12. The sancton of 28 commercial plots made by the Gram Panchayat on Panchayat Samiti's land is not possible, therefore, the allotment itself is void-ab-initio. The land cannot be given on lease by the Gram. Sabha, therefore, the permanent committee has no power to approve such illegal lease made by the Gram Sabha. Thus, the respondent - State has rightly refused to accord any approval to such allotments. 13. Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and upon perusal of Circular and Order, the petitioners have given much emphasis on the circular. As per Clause-5.4 of the Circular, it is mandatory first to fix the rate of the land and it is to be published in the vicinity, so that unemployed . educated youth and B.P.L. Families may apply for the Kiyoshak/shops under the Scheme of Mukhyamantri Rojgar.Yojna. Further, as per Clause-6.1 of the Circular, the relevant Gram Panchayat have to make survey before allotment regarding availability of the land as the land which was allotted is not in the ownership of the Gram Panchayat but belongs to Panchayat Samiti.13A. I have also considered the averments made on behalf of State that no publication was made in the largely circulated Hindi newspaper for allotment of the Kiyoshak/shops and it is not disputed that the land belongs to Panchayat Samiti and Gram Panchayat has no power to allot the same. In such circumstances, the allotment committee seriously erred not to consider this aspect and the respondent - State has rightly refused to accord the approval. It is not necessary to provide opportunity of hearing to the petitioners as the allotment itself is void-ab-initio. 14. In such circumstances, the allotment committee seriously erred not to consider this aspect and the respondent - State has rightly refused to accord the approval. It is not necessary to provide opportunity of hearing to the petitioners as the allotment itself is void-ab-initio. 14. In view of this fact, I find no merit in the writ petitions, consequently, the writ petitions fail and the same are hereby dismissed.The interim orders granted by this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7570/2004 dated 1.11.2004, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7571/2004 dated 1.11.2004, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7581/2004 dated 1.11.2004, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7572/2004 dated 1.11.2004, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7601/2004 dated 1.11.2004, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7630/2004 dated 1.11.2004, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7701/2004 dated 18.1.2005, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7702/2004 dated 18.1.2005, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7703/2004 dated 18.1.2005, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7704/2004 dated 18.1.2005, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7705/2004 dated 18.1.2005, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7706/2004 dated 18.1.2005, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7707/2004 dated 9.12.2004, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7708/2004 dated 18.1.2005, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7709/2004 dated 18.1.2005, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7713/2004 dated 18.1.2005, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7759/2004 dated 4.11.2004, S.B._Civil Writ Petition No. 7766/2004 dated 4.11.2004, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7769/2004 dated 4.11.2004, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7794/2004 dated 4.11.2004, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7.796/2004 dated 4.11.2004, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7797/2004 dated 4.11.2004, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7811/2004 dated 8.11.2004, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7827/2004 dated 8.11.2004, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7846/2004 dated 8.11.2004 stand vacated.The Stay Applications also stand dismissed.Writ petition dismissed. *******