Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 2239 (RAJ)

Gyarsi Devi v. State of Rajasthan

2009-10-29

NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN

body2009
Hon'ble JAIN, J.—Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2.The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition with the following prayer: "(i) an appropriate writ, order or direction, be issued directing the respondents to declare the petitioner as khatedar tenant of land of murabba No. 297/446 measuring 25 bighas situated in Chak 1 MSR. Tehsil Anoopgarh. Respondents may further be directed to start the water supply to the petitioners land. (ii) any other appropriate writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court considers just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner. 3. The petitioner was allotted 25 bighas irrigated land in Murabba No. 297/446 by Khudkasht Commissioner, Rajasthan, Jaipur on 29th November, 1999 (Annex. 1) and copy of it was also endorsed to the District Collector, Sriganganagar with the direction to land over the possession of the said land and to confer khatedari rights to the petitioner under Section 19(B)(1) of the Rajasthan Land Reforms & Resumption of Jagirs Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act of 1952'). 4. Initially the possession of the land was not handed over to the petitioner and she was compelled to approach this Court for the said purpose. The writ petition of the petitioner was allowed by this Court vide order dated 10th January, 2001 (Annex. 2) and the respondents were directed to hand over the possession of the allotted land to the petitioner within a period of six weeks. The State Government thereafter preferred a Review Petition but the same was also dismissed vide order dated 7th July, 2001 (Annex. 3). Thereafter, the State preferred a D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 595/2001 but the same was also dismissed vide order dated 24th September, 2004. Thereafter, possession of the allotted land was handed over to the petitioner on 19th December, 2005, after opening mutation No. 57 dated 7.10.2005 in the name of the petitioner, but name of the petitioner was shown as "gair-khatedar" in place of "khatedar." 5. The petitioner approached to the respondents to show her name as `khatedar' in place of `gair-khatedar' in the revenue record but the same was not done and in these circumstances, present writ petition was preferred. 6. The petitioner approached to the respondents to show her name as `khatedar' in place of `gair-khatedar' in the revenue record but the same was not done and in these circumstances, present writ petition was preferred. 6. The respondents filed their reply to the writ petition and in para 14 of the reply, it was admitted that the petitioner was given possession of the land in dispute on 19th December, 2005 but as per conditions of the allotment of land in colony area, the khatedari rights are conferred after three years of the allotment and not otherwise. Para 14 of the reply is reproduced as under: "14. that in reply to the averments made in Para No. 14 of the writ petition, it is respectfully submitted that it is an admitted facts that petitioner was having possession of the land in question on 19.12.2005 as evident from the Para No. 9 of the writ petition. As per the conditions of allotment of the land in the colony area a Khadedari rights are conferred after three years of the allotment and not otherwise as alleged by the petitioner in this para of the writ petition." The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that as per provisions of the Act of 1952, an allottee can not be treated as `gair-khatedar but he/she is treated as `khatedar'. Alternatively, it was contended that even if contention of the respondents is accepted then now a period of three years has already expired and the respondents may now be directed to confer khatedari rights of the land in dispute to the petitioner. 8. Learned counsel for the State contended that the petitioner was rightly shown as `gair-khatedar' of the land in dispute, which was allotted to her under the provisions of the Act of 1952 and khatedari rights can be conferred only after a period of three years. 9. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and examined he documents annexed with the writ petition and also the relevant provisions of the Act of 1952. 10. There is no dispute by learned counsel for the parties that the petitioner was allotted the land in dispute vide order dated 29th December, 1999 under the provisions of the Act of 1952. 10. There is no dispute by learned counsel for the parties that the petitioner was allotted the land in dispute vide order dated 29th December, 1999 under the provisions of the Act of 1952. The possession of said land was initially not handed over to the petitioner but after decision of the writ petition, Review petition and D.B. Civil Special Appeal; the possession of the land in dispute was handed over to the petitioner on 19th December, 2005. The petitioner referred to Sections 9 & 10 of the Act of 1952, according to which allottee of the land under the provisions of the Act of 1952 is treated as `khatedar' and not `gair-khatedar.' 11. During the course of arguments, a specific query was made to learned Government counsel to show the law under which an allottee is treated `gair-khatedar' for a period of three years or khatedari is conferred only after period of three years but he is unable to refer any rule or law or circular in this regard. Although now a period of three years has also come to end but from the relevant provisions of law, it appears that from the date of allotment/possession, the petitioner should have been treated as khatedar and not `gair-khatedar', as mentioned in the Jambadandi Annex. 5. The Khudkasht Commissioner in the initial order of allotment dated 29th December, 1999 itself has directed the District Collector, Sriganganagar to confer khatedari rights to the petitioner, of the land in dispute, after handing over the possession of the same. In these circumstances, there was no occasion on the part of respondents to treat the petitioner as `gair-khatedar'. Even otherwise, now period of three years has already expired after handing over of the possession of the land to the petitioner and as per stand taken by the respondents-State in para 14 of the reply, as quoted above, the petitioner is entitled for khatedari right of the land in dispute. In these circumstances, present writ petition deserves to be allowed. 12. Consequently, the writ petition is allowed. The petitioner is declared as khatedar of the land comprised in Murabba No. 297/446 measuring 25 bighas (6.199 Hectares) situated in Chak 1-MSR of Tehsil-Anoopgarh, District-Sriganganagar. The respondents are directed to make necessary correction in the revenue records within a period of three months. Cost is made easy.