Durga Das vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:14498)
2025 Latest Caselaw 8985 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Durga Das vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:14498) on 18 March, 2025

Author: Vinit Kumar Mathur

Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur

[2025:RJ-JD:14498]

        HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                      AT JODHPUR.
                   S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5084/2025

Durga Das S/o Ram Singh, Aged About 32 Years, Resident Of
Near Pipaji Temple, Sardarpura, Barmer (Rajasthan).
                                                                      ----Petitioner
                                      Versus
1.         State Of Rajasthan, Through The Director Cum Special
           Secretary, Directorate, Local Self Department, Jaipur
           (Rajasthan).
2.         Municipal   Council,      Barmer        (Rajasthan),       Through    Its
           Commissioner.
                                                                   ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)           :     Mr. S.P.Sharma.
For Respondent(s)           :     Mr. Monal Chugh for Mr. Rajesh
                                  Panwar, AAG.



           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Order

18/03/2025

Learned counsel for the parties are in agreement that the

controversy involved in the present matter is squarely covered by

a judgment rendered by this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition

No.205/2025 (Sujjan Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan and

Anr.) decided on 23.01.2025 in the following terms:-

"1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The present writ petition has been filed against the order dated 23.12.2023 (Annex.5), whereby, the patta issued by the respondents to the petitioner has been cancelled.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents, at the outset, submits that before passing the order dated 23.12.2023, neither any show cause notice was given nor any opportunity of hearing was extended to the petitioner. He

[2025:RJ-JD:14498] (2 of 3) [CW-5084/2025]

very fairly submits that the respondents may be given opportunity to pass a fresh order in accordance with law.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner is not in a position to refute the submissions made by learned counsel for the respondents.

5. Considering the submissions made at the bar and without going into the detailed factual matrix of the matter, it is noted that the petitioner was issued Patta by the respondents way back in the year 2022 on which certain constructions have been undertaken by the petitioner. The respondents after having noticed certain deviation with respect to the construction undertaken by the petitioner beyond the permissible limit, have cancelled the patta of the petitioner vide order dated 23.12.2023 without giving any opportunity of hearing to him and without issuing any show cause notice. The action of the respondents is in gross violation of the principles of natural justice as the order adverse to the interest of the petitioner has been passed in total non- compliance of the settled principles of law.

6. Since the learned counsel for the respondent himself has submitted before this Court that no opportunity of hearing was afforded to the petitioner before passing the order dated 23.12.2023 and a liberty is sought for passing a fresh order in accordance with law, therefore, the present writ petition merits acceptance and the same is allowed. The order dated 23.12.2023 is quashed and set-aside. However, the respondents will be at liberty to pass an appropriate order, if they felt so advised, in accordance with law.

7. The stay petition as well as other pending misc. applications, if any, stand disposed of. "

In view of the submissions made before this Court, the

present writ petition is also disposed of in the terms of order

passed in Sujjan Singh (supra).

[2025:RJ-JD:14498] (3 of 3) [CW-5084/2025]

Stay application as well as other misc. application, if any,

stand disposed of accordingly.

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J 93-Anil Singh/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)