Vijay Lal S/O Shri Pokhar Mal vs The State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 1327 Raj/2

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                  BENCH AT JAIPUR

              D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15242/2021

1.     Vijay Lal S/o Shri Pokhar Mal, Aged About 67 Years, R/o
       Village Sarnachod, Gram Panchayat Sarnachod, Tehsil
       And District Jaipur.
2.     Ratan Lal S/o Shri Narayan, R/o Village Sanchoti, Gram
       Panchayat Sarnachod, Tehsil And District Jaipur.
3.     Ramchandra S/o Mangla Ram, R/o Village Gajadharpura,
       Gram Panchayat Sarnachod, Tehsil And District Jaipur.
                                                                  ----Petitioners
                                   Versus
1.     The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Chief Secretary State
       Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2.     The    Principal       Secretary,       Department         Of   Revenue,
       Secretariat, Jaipur.
3.     District Collector, Jaipur.
4.     The Commissioner, Jaipur Development Authority, Jln
       Marg, Jaipur.
                                                                ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Amit Jindal through VC For Respondent(s) :

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AKIL KURESHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL

Judgment

07/02/2022

The petitioners are residents of Village Sarnachod. In this

public interest petition, they have challenged a resolution passed

by the Jaipur Development Authority (JDA) during its meeting

dated 17.08.2021 against agenda item No.12. Agenda item No.12

pertains to allotment of 50 sq. yards of land in Village Sarnachod

to the nomadic and semi-nomadic choice for the residents. It was

(2 of 2) [CW-15242/2021]

resolved that in the village, out of the land of the ownership of

JDA 50 sq. yards each would be allotted to the families belonging

to nomadic and semi-nomadic types.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that there is no

land other than pasture land and land of the water body in the

village which can be used for such purpose. The resolution may

therefore be quashed.

In our view, today the JDA has merely taken a policy

decision to allot land up to 50 sq. yards for nomadic and semi-

nomadic citizens for residential purposes. There is no indication in

the resolution that any part of the pasture land or the land of

water body would be used for such allotment. We therefore would

not like to proceed on such basis. If the authorities desire to settle

landless people who have been living the lives of nomads, in

principal there cannot be any objection. In fact counsel for the

petitioners also clarified that they do not object to settlement of

such families. However, such settlement should not be over the

land which is not allotable. This issue is premature and we

therefore do not propose to go into it in the present public interest

litigation.

Nothing stated in this order will prevent the petitioners from

pursuing the representation to the JDA.

With these observations the Public Interest Litigation is

disposed of.

                                   (SUDESH BANSAL),J                                                  (AKIL KURESHI),CJ

                                   BRIJ MOHAN GANDHI/17









Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)