JUDGMENT (D.B. Writ Misc. pplication No.247/2021):- 1. The writ petition (PIL) No.1985/2017 filed by the petitioner Shyam Sunder was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 08.01.2018 with the following observations :- "2. Annexures 2, 3 and 4 to the writ petition are public documents and would show that the land comprised in khasra No.150/340 and 151/340 ad-measuring 12.599 hectars in Matoriyawali Dhani, Tehsil Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh is recorded in the revenue record as forest land and encroachments have been made thereon. The encroachments are as per the report submitted by the patawari Annex.4. 3. Therefore we dispose of the petition directing the Chief Conservator of Forest, Bikaner to be in touch with the District Collector, Hanumangarh and both of them would ensure that the forest land is made free from encroachment. 4. Needless to state the action would be as per law after giving a notice to the unauthorized occupants before the action is taken. Any representation or response to the show cause notice by the person to whom notice is issued would be decided before taking action at the site." 2. The State of Rajasthan has filed the Misc. Application No.247/2021 seeking recalling/ review of the order dated 08.01.2018 whereas, the petitioner Shyam Sunder has filed Contempt Petition No.77/2019 alleging non-compliance of the order dated 08.01.2018. 3. We first proceed to consider the review application filed by the State Government. 4. Shri Sandeep Shah, learned Senior Advocate-cum-AAG representing the State urged that the order dated 08.01.2018 was passed with the assumption that the land bearing Khasra Nos.150/340 and 151/340 admeasuring 12.599 Hectares in Matoriyawali Dhani, Tehsil Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh was allotted to and in possession of the Forest Department whereas, the fact remains that after the parcel of land was originally allotted to the Forest Department for setting up nurseries, it came to light that the same was not feasible for establishment of the nurseries and thus, possession thereof was not taken by the Forest Department. The Commissioner, IGNP wrote a letter dated 27.08.1975 to the Forest Department making an enquiry whether the Forest Department had taken possession of the land allotted to it for the purpose of establishing the nurseries to which, the Forest department replied, vide letter dated 25.03.1977 that permanent houses were constructed on the land in question and thus, possession could not be taken. Another letter dated 02.06.1978 was written wherein, it was reiterated that as many as 50 houses were constructed on the land in question and it was not viable for setting up of the nurseries and tree plantation and thus, the allotment should be cancelled. Shri Shah submits that as the Forest Department never took possession of the land in question, the direction to remove the encroachments cannot be complied with by the department. Shri Shah submits that the writ petition was decided without receiving reply of the State Government and thus, these material facts, which are based on documentary evidence, could not be brought to the notice of the Court and thus, the order dated 08.01.2018 deserves to be recalled. 5. Per contra, learned counsel Shri Bhadu representing the petitioner, vehemently and fervently opposed the submissions advanced by Shri Shah and urged that the land in question was recorded as 'Gair Mumkin Nursery' in the Jamabandi and thus, the Forest Department was required to protect the land and to restore the nature thereof. 6. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the submissions advanced at bar and, have gone through the material available on record. 7. True it is that in the Jamabandi, placed on record, nature of the land in question is recorded as 'Gair Mumkin Nursery' but as is evident from the letters dated 25.03.1977 and 02.06.1978 placed on record of the review application, the Forest Department was never successful in taking possession of the land in question because way back in the year 1975, when an attempt was made to take possession, it was realized that permanent houses were constructed on the disputed parcel chunk of land. Even in the report of the Patwari (Annexure-4) dated 12.01.2017 filed alongwith the writ petition, it was mentioned that illegal colonies had been constructed on the land allotted to the Forest Department. It seems that the State's reply was not received in the writ petition (PIL) and thus, assuming the assertions of the petitioner to be true, this Court passed the order dated 08.01.2018 directing the Forest Department to remove encroachments from the land in question. It may be noted that the persons who were residing in/on the land in question (permanent houses constructed) well before 1975, were not impleaded as party respondent in the writ petition. It may be noted that the persons who were residing in/on the land in question (permanent houses constructed) well before 1975, were not impleaded as party respondent in the writ petition. The material available on record is sufficient to satisfy the Court that the Forest Department never took possession of the land in question and hence, it would not be possible for the Forest Department to comply with the direction to remove the so-called encroachments. 8. In wake of the above facts, we are of the opinion that the order dated 08.01.2018 deserves to be and is hereby recalled. The writ petition is restored to its original number and shall be listed for admission on 27.07.2022. 9. The misc. application is allowed accordingly. (In D.B. Writ Contempt No.77/2019):- 10. In view of the fact that the order dated 08.01.2018 has been recalled, the contempt petition has been rendered infructuous and is disposed of as such. A copy of this order be placed in each file.