Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 1217 (RAJ)

Loga Khan v. State Of Rajasthan

2022-04-19

VIJAY BISHNOI

body2022
JUDGMENT 1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer to quash the order dated 07.01.2022 (Annex.6) passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Barmer (for short 'the SDO') and also for quashing the entire proceedings initiated by way of communication made by the learned Additional District Collector and Member Secretary, Zila Jan Abhav Abhiyog, Nirakaran Evam Satarkta Samiti, Barmer by letter No.Pa.10(220)(1) Satarkta/2021/2977-2978 dated 18.10.2021. 2. Vide order dated 07.01.2022, the SDO has issued directions to the Tehsildar, Barmer, Revenue Inspector, Land Record, Sura, Patwari, Patwar Halka, Dudaberi, Tehsil Barmer and the petitioners as well as the private respondents to appear before the Tehsildar, Barmer for the purpose of settling the dispute regarding the boundaries of the agricultural fields of petitioners and respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that vide order dated 15.3.2011, the dispute in respect of the boundaries of the agriculture fields of the petitioners and the respondents has already been settled in the proceedings filed by the petitioners before the Assistant Collector-cum-Sub-Divisional Officer, Barmer under Section 128 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act. Learned counsel for the petitioners has further submitted that once the dispute with respect to the boundaries of the petitioners and the respondents agricultural fields has already been settled vide order dated 15.3.2011, the SDO, Barmer has no jurisdiction to issue order dated 07.01.2022 (Annex.6). 4. Learned counsel has, therefore, prayed that the reliefs prayed for in this writ petition may kindly be granted to the petitioners. 5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the material available on record. 6. After passing of the order dated 07.01.2022, the petitioners has preferred a suit for permanent injunction under Section 188 and Section 92 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act in the court of the Assistant Collector. Along with the said suit, an application for temporary injunction under Section 212 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act was also filed, however, the Assistant Collector, Barmer has refused to pass any interim relief in favour of the petitioners and dismissed the said application on 28.01.2022. Against the order dated 28.01.2022, the petitioners have preferred appeal before the Revenue Appellate Authority, Barmer (for short 'the RAA') and in that appeal, the RAA has granted interim T.I. in favour of the petitioners on 28.02.2022 and directed the parties to maintain status quo in respect of the possession as well as the revenue records. Against the order dated 28.01.2022, the petitioners have preferred appeal before the Revenue Appellate Authority, Barmer (for short 'the RAA') and in that appeal, the RAA has granted interim T.I. in favour of the petitioners on 28.02.2022 and directed the parties to maintain status quo in respect of the possession as well as the revenue records. The said appeal is still pending before the RAA and interim order is also in currency. 7. This Court is of the opinion that after passing of the order dated 07.01.2022 by the SDO, Barmer, when the petitioners have preferred a suit for permanent injunction against the wrongful ejectment and after refusal of the interim temporary injunction in their favour, they have preferred appeal before the RAA wherein interim order has been passed in favour of the petitioners, then there is no occasion for the petitioners to file this writ petition challenging the order dated 7.1.2022. As a matter of fact with the passing of the interim order by the RAA dated 28.2.2022 the directions given by the SDO dated 7.1.2022 has automatically been stayed. When the petitioners have already filed suit before the competent court for their rights over the land in question and the said suit is pending consideration, there is no need for the petitioners to file this petition challenging the order dated 7.1.2022, which is essentially an administrative order. It seems that the petitioners by filing this petition are attempting to bypass the procedure of adjudication of its right by the competent court and this Court feels that said action of the petitioners is nothing but abuse of the process of the Court. 8. Taking into consideration the above facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any merit in this writ petition. Hence, the same is hereby dismissed, however, in the facts and circumstances of this case, I deem it appropriate to impose a cost of Rs.2,000/- upon the petitioners. The petitioners shall deposit the said cost with the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority of this Court within a period of two weeks from today. 9. If the petitioners fail to deposit the cost within the stipulated time, the said fact be bring into the notice of this Court forthwith.