ORDER : 1. This misc. application has been filed by the applicants/non- petitioners seeking modification of the order dated 15.12.2021 passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2422/2021. 2. The writ petition was filed by the writ-petitioners in the nature of Public Interest Litigation assailing the action of the non- petitioners in raising construction of Panchayat Bhawan for village Vasu, Patwar Circle-Dantisar, Tehsil Girwa, District Udaipur on the land comprising in Khasra Nos.1292 and 1293. 3. The Coordinate Bench, after hearing the parties, passed the following order on 15.12.2021: “The petitioners have approached this Court by way of this writ petition in the nature of Public Interest Litigation (‘PIL’) assailing the action of the respondents in making an attempt to raise construction of the Panchayat Bhawan for the Village Vasu, Patwar Circle Dantisar, Tehsil Girwa, District Udaipur on the land bearing Khasra Nos.1292 & 1293. The petitioners have alleged that the parcel of land which has been surrendered for the Panchayat by a private individual who is having vested interest. The area is landlocked and as such, it would not be feasible to raise construction of the Panchayat Bhawan thereupon. In support of this contention, revenue maps have been annexed at Page No.34 of the writ petition. Shri Sunil Beniwal, AAG appearing for the respondents is not in a position to dispute the fact that as per the revenue record and the maps filed along with the writ petition, the parcel of land which has been surrendered by the private respondent for the Panchayat Bhawan is landlocked and it would be totally futile to construct Panchayat Bhawan on such piece of land because the public would not be able to approach the institution. In this background, the allotment order (Annexure-2) dated 08.10.2020 is hereby quashed and set aside. The respondents shall identify a suitable alternate parcel of land and allot the same for construction of the Panchayat Bhawan at the earliest. The writ petition is disposed of in these terms. All pending applications are disposed of.” 4. In this background, the allotment order (Annexure-2) dated 08.10.2020 is hereby quashed and set aside. The respondents shall identify a suitable alternate parcel of land and allot the same for construction of the Panchayat Bhawan at the earliest. The writ petition is disposed of in these terms. All pending applications are disposed of.” 4. The instant application has been filed on 28.04.2022 with the submissions that there is no other ‘Abadi’ land available in village Vasu, which can be utilized for construction of Panchayat Bhawan and that insofar as the observations made by the Court that the land identified for construction of Panchayat Bhawan is land-locked i.e. approach road/’Rasta’ is not available to said land, after passing of the judgment dated 15.12.2021, land has been surrender for making provisions for the roads to the subject land and now proper way is available. Based on the said two facts, prayer has been made that Panchayat Bhawan of Gram Panchayat Vasu, may be permitted to be constructed at the allotted land in question. 5. A reply to the application has been filed by the non-applicants/writ-petitioners, inter-alia, indicating that another land comprising Khasra No.2242/1413 ad-measuring 0.54 hectare is recorded as Government land, upon being surrendered for construction of Panchayat Bhawan vide mutation dated 28.06.2021. Further submissions have been made that the land in question is still land-locked, inasmuch as the purported surrendered land for way (‘Rasta’) is not linked to the land in question. The said land is running parallel to the drain and the proposed land is next to the drain. Further submissions have been made indicating that the land in question is not appropriate, inasmuch as ‘Gair Mumkin Nala’ (drain) bearing Khasra No.1414 is situated north of the land, which overflows during rainy season. 6. When this application came up before a Coordinate Bench on 10.01.2023, following order was passed: “The non-applicant/writ petitioners made a pertinent submission that the entire attempt of getting a Panchayat Bhawan constructed on the disputed khasras is being done to benefit a private colonizer, who is none else but the husband of the Up-Sarpanch. He further submits that even as on date, appropriate approach road is not available for accessing the disputed location thereby to benefit the colonizer, a new road and a bridge to cross adjoining nala has been sanctioned. He further submits that even as on date, appropriate approach road is not available for accessing the disputed location thereby to benefit the colonizer, a new road and a bridge to cross adjoining nala has been sanctioned. Shri Sajjan Singh, learned counsel representing the respondents submits that though financial sanction for construction of Panchayat Bhawan was issued long back, but till date, the Panchayat has not issued any work order. In spite thereof, the private person for whose apparent benefit, the entire exercise is being carried out, has started raising construction on his own personal expenses. He submits that the private colonizer/person who has offered/ surrendered the land, has started raising construction of he Panchayat Bhawan to somehow justify the impugned action. However, the expense thereof has neither been borne nor sanctioned by the Panchayat nor any money has been released towards the construction by the Sarpanch, who is petitioner No.2 in this writ petition. In view of the facts noted above, we hereby direct the District Collector, Udaipur shall carry out a physical inspection of the area in question. A map shall be prepared showing comparative distances / approach roads of the land being offered by the writ petitioners and the land sanctioned for construction of the Panchayat Bhawan in question. The District Collector, Udaipur shall file an affidavit in support of the inspection report and shall also clarify as to how construction of the building has been commenced and who has borne the expenses thereof.” 7. Pursuant to the said order, the applicants/non-petitioners have produced an additional affidavit sworn by the District Collector, Udaipur wherein, submissions have been made that by order dated 22.12.2020 administrative and financial sanction for construction of Panchayat Bhawan has been issued by the District Programme Coordinator-cum-District Collector, Udaipur; based on which the construction of Panchayat Bhawan is at plinth level and an amount of Rs.93,300/-has been spent against wages under MG-NREGA Scheme. Further indications have been made that looking to the area of the land available, the same can be used for future development. Qua the land proposed by the non-petitioners, it has been indicated that looking to area of the land, future development of other instrumentalities will be constricted. Further, maps of the land have been produced. 8. Further indications have been made that looking to the area of the land available, the same can be used for future development. Qua the land proposed by the non-petitioners, it has been indicated that looking to area of the land, future development of other instrumentalities will be constricted. Further, maps of the land have been produced. 8. The non-applicants/writ-petitioners have filed counter affidavit to the additional affidavit filed by the District Collector, inter-alia, indicating that the development work is required to be undertaken by the Gram Panchayat and on information sought from the Gram Panchayat, the Gram Panchayat has neither allotted the work, nor floated tender for the work in question and the entire exercise has been undertaken by the family members and husband of Up-Sarpanch, who happens to be a colonizer. Further submissions have been made that the Gram Panchayat has passed a resolution in its meeting dated 05.01.2022 proposing another piece of land, ad-joining Khasra No.2242/1413, however, the same has not been considered by the non-petitioners under the influence, as the same would suffice for all purposes. Allegations have been reiterated that the piece of land was never proposed by the Gram Panchayat-Vasu as no proposal was sought and that the order was passed by the State on its own at the persuasion of the husband of Up-Sarpanch for his personal benefit. 9. Learned Additional Advocate General made submissions that as the writ petition was disposed of by observing that as the land of Panchayat Bhawan was land-locked, the allotment was quashed and the non-petitioners were directed to identify a suitable alternate parcel of land and allot the same for construction of Panchayat Bhawan at the earliest. However, as now the defect of the land in question being land-locked, has been taken care by way of surrender of land in various other Khasra(s), to make available the approach way/road, the said Panchayat Bhawan and a culvert has been constructed on the drain (‘Nala’), the order passed by the Court, deserves modification. Further submissions have been made that no other ‘Abadi’ land is available for construction of Panchayat Bhawan and on that count also, the order requires modification. With reference to the report of the District Collector, submissions were made that the land in question is now appropriate for constructing Panchayat Bhawan and, therefore also, the order requires modification. 10. Further submissions have been made that no other ‘Abadi’ land is available for construction of Panchayat Bhawan and on that count also, the order requires modification. With reference to the report of the District Collector, submissions were made that the land in question is now appropriate for constructing Panchayat Bhawan and, therefore also, the order requires modification. 10. Learned counsel appearing for the non-applicants/writ-petitioners vehemently opposed the submissions. It was submitted that the very fact that present application has been filed, clearly shows that the State is under influence of the persons, who are interested in getting the Panchayat Bhawan constructed on the land in question. It was emphasized that the indications now made regarding land being available for constructing approach roads and construction of culvert clearly establishes the case of the writ-petitioners that the land in question was land-locked and, therefore, the same couldn’t be allotted for the purpose of construction of Panchayat Bhawan. It was also emphasized that the submissions made about no other land being available is also factually incorrect, as has been demonstrated by filing material on record, as well as the pending proposal with the State, which also is not being processed only on account of political considerations. Counsel stated that though the non-applicants have placed on record specific material indicating that the purported construction has taken place dehors the established procedure, wherein the same could only taken place through Gram Panchayat, after issuing tender etc., stands established as no rejoinder has been filed to the said counter affidavit of the non-applicants and, therefore, the application essentially seeking a review of the order dated 15.12.2021, deserves dismissal. 11. We have considered submissions made by the counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record. 12. The foundation for passing of the order dated 15.12.2021 by a Coordinate Bench of this Court (to which one of us Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sameer Jain, was a party) that the land where the Panchayat Bhawan was sought to be constructed, was land-locked, as there was no approach road/way available to the said land, therefore, the allotment order was quashed and set aside and it was left open for the non-petitioners to identify a suitable alternate parcel of land and allot the same for construction of Panchayat Bhawan at the earliest. 13. 13. The said finding of the Court regarding the allotted land in question being land-locked stands firmly established by filing of the present application indicating that the land for construction of road has now been surrendered by various Khatedar(s). The very fact that the land in question was allotted for construction of Panchayat Bhawan after being surrendered by a private person without even determining the status of the land and whether any approach road to the said land/way is available, clearly reflects non-application of mind by the authorities only with a view to allot a particular piece of land for the obvious reasons. The said fact was sufficient for the Court to quash the allotment. The subsequent event, which is in the nature of curing the defect in the land, which has led to quashing of the allotment, cannot rectify non-application of mind by the authorities; rather the same establishes such blatant non-application. 14. So far as the plea regarding ‘Abadi’ land being unavailable, the same aspect also cannot be countenanced in view of the fact that the land comprising Khasra No.2242/1413 is recorded as Government land and further proposal is pending before the State Government. 15. Irrespective of the said aspect, the manner in which the State has proceeded in the matter, which aspect is clearly discernible from the material produced by the non-applicants/writ-petitioners in counter affidavit to the additional affidavit filed by the applicants, which has not been controverted by the applicants, the present application essentially is only an attempt to seek rehearing of the matter in the garb of an application seeking modification, which is impermissible in law. 16. In view of above discussion, there is no substance in the application seeking modification of the order dated 15.12.2021, the same is, therefore, dismissed.