Poonma Ram vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 2784 Raj

[2023/RJJD/008973]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18799/2022

1. Poonma Ram S/o Ratna Ram, Aged About 60 Years, R/o Village Hirani Tardo Ki Dhani, Bhedana, Tehsil Gudamalani, District Barmer.

2. Pokar Ram S/o Ratna Ram, Aged About 55 Years, R/o Village Hirani Tardo Ki Dhani, Bhedana, Tehsil Gudamalani, District Barmer.

3. Mehraj Ram S/o Kheraj Ram, Aged About 46 Years, R/o Village Hirani Tardo Ki Dhani, Bhedana, Tehsil Gudamalani, District Barmer.

4. Shera Ram S/o Kheraj Ram, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Village Hirani Tardo Ki Dhani, Bhedana, Tehsil Gudamalani, District Barmer.

5. Hemi W/o Kheraj Ram, Aged About 67 Years, R/o Village Hirani Tardo Ki Dhani, Bhedana, Tehsil Gudamalani, District Barmer.

----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Tehsildar Gudamalani District Barmer.

2. Achala Ram S/o Taja Ram, R/o Village Hirani Tardo Ki Dhani, Bhedana, Tehsil Gudamalani, District Barmer.

3. Aasu Ram S/o Taja Ram, R/o Village Hirani Tardo Ki Dhani, Bhedana, Tehsil Gudamalani, District Barmer.

4. Rupa Ram S/o Taja Ram, R/o Village Hirani Tardo Ki Dhani, Bhedana, Tehsil Gudamalani, District Barmer.

5. Ishra Ram S/o Taja Ram, R/o Village Hirani Tardo Ki Dhani, Bhedana, Tehsil Gudamalani, District Barmer.

6. Kasumbi W/o Taja Ram, R/o Village Hirani Tardo Ki Dhani, Bhedana, Tehsil Gudamalani, District Barmer.

7. Kishna Ram S/o Deda Ram, R/o Village Hirani Tardo Ki Dhani, Bhedana, Tehsil Gudamalani, District Barmer.

8. Kamla Ram S/o Deda Ram, R/o Village Hirani Tardo Ki Dhani, Bhedana, Tehsil Gudamalani, District Barmer.

9. Tipu D/o Kumbha Ram, Minor Through Her Natural Guardian Mother Respondent No. 8 Kamla W/o Kumbha Ram, R/o Village Hirani Tardo Ki Dhani, Bhedana, Tehsil Gudamalani, District Barmer.

10. Hanuman S/o Kumbha Ram, Minor Through His Natural Guardian Mother Respondent No. 8 Kamla W/o Kumbha Ram, R/o Village Hirani Tardo Ki Dhani, Bhedana, Tehsil Gudamalani, District Barmer.

11. Bhagwati D/o Kumbha Ram, Minor Through His Natural Guardian Mother Respondent No. 8 Kamla W/o Kumbha Ram, R/o Village Hirani Tardo Ki Dhani, Bhedana, Tehsil

[2023/RJJD/008973] (2 of 5) [CW-18799/2022]

Gudamalani, District Barmer.

12. Mana Ram S/o Padma Ram, R/o Village Hirani Tardo Ki Dhani, Bhedana, Tehsil Gudamalani, District Barmer.

13. Ramu Devi W/o Padma Ram, R/o Village Hirani Tardo Ki Dhani, Bhedana, Tehsil Gudamalani, District Barmer.

14. Rama Ram S/o Hira Ram, R/o Village Hirani Tardo Ki Dhani, Bhedana, Tehsil Gudamalani, District Barmer.

15. Hukma Ram S/o Hira Ram, R/o Village Hirani Tardo Ki Dhani, Bhedana, Tehsil Gudamalani, District Barmer.

16. Khangar Ram S/o Hira Ram, R/o Village Hirani Tardo Ki Dhani, Bhedana, Tehsil Gudamalani, District Barmer.

17. Dungar Ram S/o Hira Ram, R/o Village Hirani Tardo Ki Dhani, Bhedana, Tehsil Gudamalani, District Barmer.

18. Khetu Devi W/o Hira Ram, R/o Village Hirani Tardo Ki Dhani, Bhedana, Tehsil Gudamalani, District Barmer.

19. Hanuman Ram S/o Dana Ram, R/o Village Hirani Tardo Ki Dhani, Bhedana, Tehsil Gudamalani, District Barmer.

20. Khema Ram S/o Dana Ram, R/o Village Hirani Tardo Ki Dhani, Bhedana, Tehsil Gudamalani, District Barmer.

21. Gumni W/o Dana Ram, R/o Village Hirani Tardo Ki Dhani, Bhedana, Tehsil Gudamalani, District Barmer.

22. Thakra Ram S/o Sona Ram, R/o Village Hirani Tardo Ki Dhani, Bhedana, Tehsil Gudamalani, District Barmer.

23. Damma Ram S/o Sona Ram, R/o Village Hirani Tardo Ki Dhani, Bhedana, Tehsil Gudamalani, District Barmer.

24. Deraj Ram S/o Hira Ram, R/o Village Hirani Tardo Ki Dhani, Bhedana, Tehsil Gudamalani, District Barmer.

25. Pura Ram S/o Hira Ram, R/o Village Hirani Tardo Ki Dhani, Bhedana, Tehsil Gudamalani, District Barmer.

26. Taja Ram S/o Hira Ram, R/o Village Hirani Tardo Ki Dhani, Bhedana, Tehsil Gudamalani, District Barmer.

27. Khemi D/o Kesa Ram, R/o Village Hirani Tardo Ki Dhani, Bhedana, Tehsil Gudamalani, District Barmer.

28. Harji Ram S/o Ratna Ram, R/o Village Hirani Tardo Ki Dhani, Bhedana, Tehsil Gudamalani, District Barmer.

29. Hastu Devi W/o Amra Ram S/o Ratna Ram, R/o Village Hirani Tardo Ki Dhani, Bhedana, Tehsil Gudamalani, District Barmer.

30. Tikma Ram S/o Jetha Ram, R/o Village Hirani Tardo Ki Dhani, Bhedana, Tehsil Gudamalani, District Barmer.

31. Khuma Ram S/o Jetha Ram, R/o Village Hirani Tardo Ki Dhani, Bhedana, Tehsil Gudamalani, District Barmer.

32. Lachha Ram S/o Jetha Ram, R/o Village Hirani Tardo Ki Dhani, Bhedana, Tehsil Gudamalani, District Barmer.

33. Maga Ram S/o Jetha Ram, R/o Village Hirani Tardo Ki Dhani, Bhedana, Tehsil Gudamalani, District Barmer.

 [2023/RJJD/008973]                    (3 of 5)                       [CW-18799/2022]


                                                                  ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)          :     Mr. RJ Punia.
For Respondent(s)          :



              HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI

                                      Order

06/04/2023

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners aggrieved

of the order dated 16.11.2022 passed by Board of Revenue,

wherein, the appeal filed by the petitioners has been admitted and

notices have been ordered to be issued to the respondents and

the next date fixed by the Board of Revenue was 31.01.2023.

Submissions have been made that it was required of the

Board of Revenue to have passed an interim order on the stay

application filed by the petitioners and failure to pass the interim

order on the stay application while issuing notices, is not justified.

Learned counsel for the petitioners made submissions that

once the appeal was admitted, as a natural consequence interim

order should have been granted by the Board of Revenue and not

passing of the interim order by the Board of Revenue has resulted

in a consequence, whereby, the petitioners may be harmed.

Reliance has been placed on Sarwan Singh & Ors. Vs. Bhajan

Singh & Ors.: 1994 (1) RBJ 24.

I have considered the submissions made by counsel for the

petitioners and have perused the material available on record.

The Board of Revenue had fixed 31.01.2023 as the next

date.

[2023/RJJD/008973] (4 of 5) [CW-18799/2022]

On 31.01.2023, the record, as summoned, was received by

the Board of Revenue and the next date fixed by it is 04.07.2023.

A specific query was put to counsel for the petitioners as to

whether on 31.01.2023, submissions were made before the Board

of Revenue to hear the stay application and once the Board of

Revenue had given a long date of 04.07.2023 whether in last two

months any attempt has been made to get the stay application

heard.

Learned counsel made submissions that unless the

respondents are served, the Board of Revenue does not hear the

stay application and, therefore, no such prayer was made before

the Board of Revenue.

A perusal of the order passed by the Board of Revenue

indicates that while admitting the appeal, the notices have been

issued.

The plea raised that once the petition has been admitted, as

a consequence, interim order has to be granted by the Board of

Revenue, cannot be countenanced, inasmuch as, it would depend

on facts and circumstances of each given case, as to whether the

Authority/Board while issuing notices to the respondents would

grant an interim order or not.

Challenging the order before this Court on the said count

without making any attempt to seek an injunction/interim order

from the Board of Revenue after notices have been issued, cannot

be countenanced.

So far as judgment in the case of Sarwan Singh (supra) is

concerned, the observations made by the Division Bench cannot

be read as a rule of law. It would depend on circumstances of

[2023/RJJD/008973] (5 of 5) [CW-18799/2022]

each given case, as to whether the stay order has to be granted or

not.

In view thereof, no case for interference of this Court in the

order dated 16.11.2022 is made out. It would be open for the

petitioners to approach the Board of Revenue by way of an

appropriate application, in case, the petitioner, during the

pendency of the appeal, after issuance of notice on 16.11.2022

feels threatened in relation to the execution of the decree passed

against him, to seek an appropriate order.

ARUN BHANSALI),J 86-pradeep/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)