Rajendra Kumar vs Board Of Revenue, Ajmer
2021 Latest Caselaw 11215 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7135/2021

1. Rajendra Kumar S/o Bhikharam, Aged About 52 Years, By Caste Brahmin, R/o Ward No. 15 Bhadra, Tehsil Bhadra, District Hanumangarh.

2. Krishna Baldev S/o Bhikharam, Aged About 50 Years, By Caste Brahmin, R/o Ward No. 15 Bhadra, Tehsil Bhadra, District Hanumangarh.

----Petitioners Versus

1. Board Of Revenue, Ajmer, Through Its Registrar.

2. Shabbir Hussain S/o Mannu Khan, By Caste Kayamkhani Musalman, R/o Ward No. 4, Bhadra, Tehsil Bhadra, District Hanumangarh.

3. State Of Rajasthan, Through Tehsildar (Revenue), Bhadra, Tehsil Bhadra, District Hanumangarh.

                                                                ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)          :   Mr. Moti Singh
For Respondent(s)          :   Mr. R.S. Choudhary



             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

                           Judgment / Order

20/07/2021

The matter comes up for consideration of application

preferred on behalf of the respondent No. 2 with a prayer for

vacating ex parte interim order dated 18.05.2021 passed by this

Court.

With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the

matter is finally heard.

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners being

aggrieved with the order dated 14.12.2020 passed by the Board of

Revenue, Ajmer in revision No.4137/2020 and order dated

(2 of 3) [CW-7135/2021]

25.03.2021 passed by Board of Revenue, Ajmer in Misc. Case

No.1309/2021. The Board of Revenue vide order dated

14.12.2020 while accepting the revision preferred on behalf of the

respondent No.2, has directed the Divisional Commissioner,

Bikaner to decide the appeal preferred on his behalf before it

within a period of three months and has further directed to

maintain status quo with respect to the land in question.

The review petition preferred by the petitioners against the

order of the Board of Revenue dated 14.12.2020 has been

dismissed vide order dated 25.03.2021.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that while

passing the impugned order dated 14.12.2020, the Board of

Revenue has not given opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. It

is also argued that the revision petition preferred on behalf of the

respondent No.2 before the Board of Revenue was also not

maintainable. Learned counsel has further submitted that the

Board of Revenue without considering the above aspect of the

matter has illegally rejected the review petition filed by the

petitioners vide order dated 25.03.2021.

Per contra Mr. R.S. Choudhary counsel for respondent No. 2

has supported the impugned order.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going

through the material available on record, it appears that the Board

of Revenue has accepted the revision petition filed on behalf of the

respondent No.2 without even issuing notices to the petitioners

and, as such, the order passed by the Board of Revenue dated

14.12.2020 is liable to be set aside. In such circumstances, the

impugned order dated 14.12.2020 as well as the order dated

(3 of 3) [CW-7135/2021]

25.03.2021 passed by the Board of Revenue are hereby quashed

and set aside.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that

the Divisional Commissioner, Bikaner shall decide the appeal

preferred on behalf of the respondent No.2 expeditiously strictly in

accordance with law after providing opportunity of hearing to the

parties concerned, preferably within a period of one month from

the date of production of certified copy of this order.

Stay petition is also disposed of.

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J

79-mohit/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)