Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 360 (RAJ)

Babu Khan v. State of Rajasthan

2013-02-12

VINEET KOTHARI

body2013
JUDGMENT 1. - Heard learned counsels for the parties. Both the sides counsel agree that the controversy involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by a decision of this Court delivered in S.B.C.W.P. No. 6898/2006, Amar Singh Jat v. State of Rajasthan & Ors., decided on 8.2.2013 , whereby the writ petitions came to be disposed of in the following terms: "17. From the aforesaid, it appears that since the learned Singh Member of Board of Revenue failed to take a comprehensive view of the entire disputed land of 2375 Bigha and 16 Biswa and passed self- contradictory orders in the impugned order dated 5.5.2005 itself as narrated above for 20 Bigha and 4 Biswa of land, dealt with in this Court in CW No. 2984/2005, Dayal Giri Chela v. State of Rajasthan & Ors., decided on 29.11.2007 and Board, has also to the extent of 146 Bigha and 2 Biswa of land decreed in favour of State vide decree dated 26.2.1973 itself, quoted above and for which there was no occasion of reference to the Board under Section 232 arising out of the impugned decree dated 26.2.1973, but still the learned Single Member of Board of Revenue in the operative portion of the order dated 5.5.2005 has directed that the entire land 2375 Bigha and 16 Biswa be recorded in the name of State Government giving rise to obvious incongruities in the order dated 5.5.2005, the part of.which has already been quashed by this Court qua the petitioner, Dayal Girl in CW No. 2984/2005, decided on 29.11.2007. Since the genesis of the present batch of writ petition, 32 in number, as per Schedule appended with this judgment is the impugned order of Board dated 5.5.2005, this Court is of the considered opinion that the impugned order dated 5.5.2005 in its entirety cannot be sustained and it is required to be set aside. The same is accordingly set aside and the entire case again deserve to be remanded back to the Board of Revenue. 18. Obviously, the rival claims of private parties, Municipal Council, Nohar and the State have arisen in this litigation with respect to the said total land measuring 2375 Bigha 16 Biswas situated in Nohar, District Hanumangarh. The same is accordingly set aside and the entire case again deserve to be remanded back to the Board of Revenue. 18. Obviously, the rival claims of private parties, Municipal Council, Nohar and the State have arisen in this litigation with respect to the said total land measuring 2375 Bigha 16 Biswas situated in Nohar, District Hanumangarh. Unless the complete and comprehensive view with respect to said entire land of 2375 Bigha 16 Biswas is taken by the final fact finding body i.e. the Board of Revenue, the various disputes, which have so far arisen on account of such different orders passed at different levels, cannot be put to an end. Therefore, there is a need for the Board of Revenue to deal with the matter again in total and comprehensive view of the entire matter in respect of the entire land in question measuring 2375 Bigha 16 Biswas, situated at Nohar, District Hanumangarh. 19. Accordingly, while remanding the matter back to the learned Board of Revenue, this Court is of the further opinion that the Bench of at least three members of Board of Revenue, headed by the Chairman of the Board of Revenue himself, should re-decide this reference/revision while exercising its powers tinder Sections 232 and 221 of the Act of 1995 read together, instead of a Single Member and such larger Bench should consider all the previous orders, decrees and the judgments rendered by this Court with respect to said land in question. They should not only fully quote all these orders with a list of dates in sequence of these orders and other relevant events, while re-deciding this matter again, but also indicate their findings and reasons and impact of these orders and decisions on the various parts and portion of the said entire land of 2375 Bigha and 16 Biswas. The previous orders passed by the Board of Revenue and its lower Revenue Courts or Appellate Authority will not stand in the way of the said larger Bench of Board of Revenue and the Board of Revenue is expected, and it therefore, directed to rehear the entire matter after giving opportunity of hearing to all the concerned parties, namely, State through the Revenue Department, Municipal Council, Nohar and the private parties, who are involved in the present litigation in the present set of writ petitions before this Court. The Larger Bench of Board of Revenue of three members, headed by the Chairman, is expected to give their own reasons, findings after considering the entire material on record, original revenue record, various decrees and orders and judgments of this Court and thereafter decide the respective rights of the parties. While deciding the matter afresh, the Board of Revenue shall make the map of the entire land in question (measuring 2375 Bigha 16 Biswa), which will form the part of their judgment, showing their respective findings and allocation of the land in question with respective rights of the parties determined by them. 20. In some of the cases, pending before this Court, interim relief had been granted to the parties in the form of status quo orders, therefore, it is directed that till the Board of Revenue so re-decides the aforesaid matter, which it is expected to decide with in one year from today, the status quo of the entire land 2375 Bigha and 16 Biswas in question, shall be maintained by all the concerned parties. No further alienation of the land in question falling within the said area of 2375 Bigha and 16 Biswas of the land shall be made by any party. 21. With these observations and directions, all these writ petitions are disposed of. The order impugned dated 5.5.2005 passed by learned Single Member of Board of Revenue is set aside. All the parties either in person or through their respective counsels, in the first instance may appear before the Chairman of Board of Revenue/Bench headed by him on 1.3.2013 and thereafter the learned Chairman of Board of Revenue may constitute the three members bench to expeditiously hear the aforesaid matter as indicated above and decide the same with in one year from today. No order as to costs. A copy of this order be sent to the concerned parties and the Chairman, Board of Revenue, Ajmer, forthwith for information and necessary action." 2. Accordingly, the present writ petition is also disposed of in the same terms. No costs. A copy of this order be sent to the concerned parties and Board of Revenue and lower Revenue Courts forthwith.Petition disposed of. *******