Kana Ram vs Board Of Revenue, Ajmer
2022 Latest Caselaw 3536 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 163/2022

Kana Ram S/o Sh. Surja Ram Aheer, Aged About 60 Years, R/o Village Dugastau, Tehsil Jayal, District Nagaur.

----Appellant Versus

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

2. Revenue Appellate Authority, Nagaur.

3. Sub Divisional Officer, Jayal, District Nagaur.

4. Tehsildar, Tehsil Jayal, District Nagaur.

5. Smt. Kamli @ Kamla Devi, R/o Village Dugastau, Tehsil Jayal, District Nagaur.

6. Smt. Prema Devi, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Dugastau, Tehsil Jayal, District Nagaur.

7. Mala Ram Adopted, Aged About 44 Years, Resident Of Village Dugastau, Tehsil Jayal, District Nagaur.

8. Gordhan Ram, Aged About 66 Years, Resident Of Village Dugastau, Tehsil Jayal, District Nagaur.

9. Mangilal, R/o Village Dugastau, Tehsil Jayal, District Nagaur.

----Respondents

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Manisha Sishodia, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Vasu Dev Gaur For Respondent(s) : Mr. G. R. Punia, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Mahaveer Bhanwariya Mr. Vikash Bijarnia

HON'BLE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN GOPAL VYAS

Judgment / Order

08/03/2022

Heard.

The appeal has been filed against interim order dated

23.02.2022.

Learned Single Judge has passed interim order stating the

fact of orders passed by the Board of Revenue and other

subordinate revenue boards.

Learned Senior counsel for appellant would argue that while

passing the interim order various relevant consideration as

(2 of 2) [SAW-163/2022]

advanced before the learned Single Judge, particularly, that the

appellant would be left without any access from his own land, has

not been appreciated. He would submit that while passing interim

order balance ought to be made & atleast some access allowed

even if the declaration of the way as public way, is kept in

abeyance.

Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner would submit that

though the interim order does not record any detailed reason, it

was necessary for learned Single Judge to given some reasons for

passing the interim order. According to him, the decision and

declaration of the Revenue Boards declaring a particular land as a

"public way" suffers from fundamental defects, which was not

noticed by the learned Single Judge.

We find that the learned Single Judge has passed interim

order in exercise of its discretion. The law does not, as such,

require that while passing interim order, any detailed reason need

to be given.

However taking into consideration the submissions made by

the learned Sr. counsel appearing for the appellant, it would be

open for the appellant to pray for modification of interim order and

to seek relief of limited nature to provide him access during the

pendency of the appeal.

Subject to the aforesaid observations the appeal is

dismissed.

(MADAN GOPAL VYAS),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),ACJ

6-nidhi/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)