Prahlad vs B.O.R. (2023:Rj-Jp:28661)
2023 Latest Caselaw 5840 Raj/2

[2023:RJ-JP:28661]

        HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                    BENCH AT JAIPUR

               S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4840/1994
Prahlad S/o Brijmohan Purohit Resident of Palsana present
resident of Bay, Tehsil Dantaramgarh, District Sikar
                                                                    ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors.
                                                                 ----Respondents

Connected With S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 386/1995 Prahlad S/o Shri Pratap & Anr.

----Petitioners Versus Boad of Revenue, Rajasthan Ajmer & Ors

----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5355/1998 Ramoli Andors

----Petitioners Versus State Andors

----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4126/1999 Gopal And Ors

----Petitioners Versus B O R And Ors

----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3437/2001 Munni Devi And Ors

----Petitioners Versus State And Ors

----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9739/2016

[2023:RJ-JP:28661] (2 of 5) [CW-4840/1994]

Smt Gulli And Ors

----Petitioners Versus Thakur Ji Shri Sitaram Ji Andors

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pawan Pareek Mr. Anil Sharma Ms. Anita Agarwal with Mr. Anubhav Agarwal Mr. Sanjay Mehrishi with Mr. Rakesh Saini Mr. Narendra Kumar Singha, for Mr. N.K. Maloo Mr. Raghvendra Singh For Respondent(s) : Mr. Raghvendra singh Mr. Deepak Pareek Mr. Ajay Gupta Mr. Akshay Sharma, AGC Mr. Pratyush Sharma Ms. Sampati Sharma

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA

Judgment / Order

11/10/2023

Application (IA No.1/2021) in S.B. Civil Writ Petition

No.3437/2001

1. Application(IA No.1/2021) has been filed by the applicant-

petitioner under Order 22 Rule 3 CPC for taking on record the

legal representatives of deceased-petitioner No.2- Jamna Das, on

record.

2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner No.2-

Jamna Das has expired on 06.11.2008 and therefore, his legal

representatives may kindly be taken on record.

3. In view of the provisions of law and for the reasons

mentioned in the application (IA No.1/2021), same is allowed and

[2023:RJ-JP:28661] (3 of 5) [CW-4840/1994]

the legal representatives of deceased-petitioner No.2- Jamna Das

are taken on record and the amended cause-title filed alongwith

the application is also taken on record.

Application (IA No.1/2023) in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.

5355/1998

1. Application(IA No.1/2023) has been filed by the applicant-

petitioner taking on record the legal representatives of deceased-

petitioner No.1/2- Vasudev and deceased-petitioner No.4 Rupi, on

record.

2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner No.1/2-

Vasudev has expired on 24.04.2023 and petitioner No.4- Rupi has

expired on 26.06.2022 and therefore, their legal representatives

may kindly be taken on record.

3. In view of the provisions of law and for the reasons

mentioned in the application (IA No.1/2023), same is allowed and

the legal representatives of deceased-petitioner No.1/2- Vasudev

and deceased-petitioner No.4- Rupi are taken on record and the

amended cause-title filed alongwith the application is also taken

on record.

1. All these writ petitions pertain to dispute pertaining the

mandir mafia land.

2. In a D.B. appeal five questions related to mandir mafia land

were referred to the Larger Bench which are as under:-

"(i) Whether land held in Jagir by idol cultivated by-

(a) person other than shebait/pujari, or

(b) hired labour or servants engaged by shebait/pujari as tenant of deity (a perpetual minor) will be regarded as held in tenancy by person cultivating same as tenant of deity;

[2023:RJ-JP:28661] (4 of 5) [CW-4840/1994]

Will still be held as land held in personal cultivation of deity or it would be treated as land in tenancy of person cultivating it as tenant of deity;

(ii) what are rights of Hindu deity in lands held by it in name of Shebait/pujari on date of resumption of such Jagir under provisions of RajasthanL Land Reforms & Resumption of Jagir Act, 1952:

(iii) whether such land held by shebait or pujari in their name after date of resumption of such Jagir, can be alienated by them-If so, its effect?

(iv) whether any person can acquire right by adverse possession in lands of aforesaid nature;

(v) whether any time limit can be fixed for reference u/s.82 of Land Revenue Act or u/s. 232 of Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 in respect of land held by Hindu deity ? If so, to what extent ?"

3. Questions referred to the Larger Bench were decided vide

order dated 15.07.2015 in D.B. Civil Special Appeal No.185/2001.

Against the order dated 15.07.2015, certain persons preferred SLP

No.19894/2015 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court which is still

pending for disposal.

4. It is brought to the notice of this Court that in a similar

matter- D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.496/2002 decided on

23.03.2018, the Division Bench ordered that since decision dated

15.07.2015 is under scrutiny in SLP No.19894/2015 before the

Supreme Court, the parties will be governed by the decision

passed in SLP No.19894/2015 and the State Government will take

action only after the SLP dismissed in favour of the State

Government and till then no action will be taken against the

petitioner.

5. This Court in a similar matter- S.B. Civil Writ Petition

No.666/1986 decided 01.11.2022 has also observed that the issue

in regard to challenging the order dated 15.07.2015, SLP is

[2023:RJ-JP:28661] (5 of 5) [CW-4840/1994]

pending before the Supreme Court therefore, the parties shall

maintain the status quo and the State Government will be free to

take action in case SLP is dismissed in favour of the State

Government.

6. Taking into consideration the facts of the cases and the issue

involved therein and the orders of the Division Bench as well as

the Co-ordinate Bench, as referred above, this Court also disposes

the present writ petitions observing that the parties will be

governed by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP

No.19894/2015 filed against the order dated 15.07.2015 passed

in D.B. Appeal No.185/2001 Tara & 35 Ors Vs. State of Rajashtan

and Anr. and till then both the parties shall maintain the status

quo in regard to the land in question and the State Government

will be free to take action after dismissal of the appeal in favour of

the State Government.

7. All the parties shall be governed by the decision of the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP No.19894/2015 and in case of any

difficulty, parties may move an appropriate application for revival

of the writ petitions.

8. Accordingly, the present writ petitions stand disposed of.

9. Since the main petitions have been disposed of, all other

pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

10. A copy of this order be placed in connected files.

(GANESH RAM MEENA),J

ARTI SHARMA /2-7

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)