Lal Deen vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 3448 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3456/2022

1. Lal Deen S/o Goheram, Aged About 79 Years, By Caste Muslanman, R/o Village Shekhon Ka Talla, Tehsil Pokran, District Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.

2. Shale Mohammed S/o Lal Deen, Aged About 51 Years, By Caste Muslanman, R/o Village Shekhon Ka Talla, Tehsil Pokran, District Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.

3. Safi Mohammed S/o Lal Deen, Aged About 49 Years, By Caste Muslanman, R/o Village Shekhon Ka Talla, Tehsil Pokran, District Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.

4. Mahaboob Ali S/o Shale Mohammed, Aged About 34 Years, By Caste Muslanman, R/o Village Shekhon Ka Talla, Tehsil Pokran, District Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.

5. Shahanvaj S/o Shale Mohammed, Aged About 33 Years, By Caste Muslanman, R/o Village Shekhon Ka Talla, Tehsil Pokran, District Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.

6. Shabnam D/o Shale Mohammed, Aged About 23 Years, By Caste Muslanman, R/o Village Shekhon Ka Talla, Tehsil Pokran, District Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.

7. Sultan S/o Shale Mohammed, Aged About 19 Years, By Caste Muslanman, R/o Village Shekhon Ka Talla, Tehsil Pokran, District Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.

----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Commissioner Colonization, Bikaner.

2. The Dy. Commissioner, Colonization Nachana, District Jaisalmer.

3. The Colonization Tehsildar, Nachana No. 2, District Jaisalmer.

                                                                ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)        :     Mr. Binja Ram Jajra




                                           (2 of 3)                 [CW-3456/2022]


            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

                          Judgment / Order

05/03/2022

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted

that in the matter being SBCWP No. 16992/2018 (Jannat

& Ors. Versus State of Rajasthan and Ors) involving

identical issue, this Court vide judgment dated

01.11.2018 ordered that till the petitioners' suit and

injunction application are decided, they shall not be

dispossessed from the land in question. Learned counsel

for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners filed

a suit for permanent injunction in the Court of Assistant

Commissioner, Mohangarh A and B District Jaisalmer in

the year 2016 for permanent injunction with a prayer

that he may be declared as khatedar of the disputed

land. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the

petitioner that the respondent No.2 is neither deciding

the suit filed by the petitioner nor the application for

temporary injunction preferred along with suit under

Section 212 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has also

submitted that as in identical writ petitions, this Court

has already directed to decide the suit and the injunction

application within a period of one year and till then the

(3 of 3) [CW-3456/2022]

agriculturists may not be dispossessed from the land in

question, a similar direction may be issued in this case

also.

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioners and

after going through the material available on record, this

Court is of the opinion that it is not in the fitness of

things to issue directions to not to dispossess the

persons, who have filed Revenue Suit for the land in

question till the decision of the said suit, however, it

would be appropriate to direct the respondent No.2 - the

Dy. Commissioner, Colonization Nachana, Distt. Jaisalmer,

before whom the suit and temporary injunction

application of the petitioners is pending, either to decide

the suit expeditiously and if it is not possible for him to

decide the suit expeditiously, then at least he shall decide

the application filed on behalf of the petitioners for

temporary injunction within a period of six weeks from

the date of submission of certified copy of this order.

Ordered accordingly.

Hence, this writ petition is disposed of.

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J

168-msrathore/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)