Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Radha vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 22 May, 2025
Author: Dinesh Mehta
Bench: Dinesh Mehta
[2025:RJ-JD:24916]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7763/2025
1. Radha W/o Late Shri Rajesh, Aged About 47 Years,
Resident Of Viramnagar, Village Post Beru, Tehsil And
District Jodhpur. At Present Sarpanch Gram Panchayat
Beru, Panchayat Samiti Keru District Jodhpur.
2. Mangla Ram S/o Shri Kana Ram, Aged About 50 Years,
Resident Of Village Dedipanada, Tehsil And District
Jodhpur.
3. Harchand Ram S/o Shri Gokal Ram, Resident Of Village
Dedipanada, Tehsil And District Jodhpur.
4. Anna Ram S/o Shri Rawta Ram, Resident Of Village
Dedipanada, Tehsil And District Jodhpur.
5. Gokal Ram S/o Shri Chola Ram, Resident Of Village
Dedipanada, Tehsil And District Jodhpur.
6. Poona Ram S/o Shri Bhura Ram, Resident Of Village
Dedipanada, Tehsil And District Jodhpur.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department
Of Revenue (Gr.i), Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat,
Jaipur.
2. Dy. Secretary, Department Of Revenue (Gr.i),
Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
3. Secretary, Department Of Rural Development And
Panchayati Raj, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat,
Jaipur.
4. Board Of Revenue, Rajasthan, Ajmer Through Its
Registrar.
5. District Collector (Land Record), Jodhpur.
6. Sub Divisional Officer, Jodhpur (North).
7. Tehsildar (Revenue), Jodhpur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. R.S. Choudhary with
Dr. Ashok Choudhary
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Yogesh Sharma for
[2025:RJ-JD:24916] (2 of 4) [CW-7763/2025]
Mr. S.S. Ladrecha, AAG
Mr. Rishi Soni
Mr. Harshit Bhurani (through VC)
JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
Order
22/05/2025
1. The present writ petition has been filed challenging the
creation of new revenue village in the name of 'Dhora Bhomiyaji
Nagar' mainly on two grounds - firstly, the land of Khasra No.
407, which has been earmarked for the development of
infrastructure facilities of new revenue village has been kept
reserved for Gair Mumkin Agore (catchment area) and therefore,
any construction activity thereupon is impermissible in law;
another ground which the petitioners have taken is that the name
'Dhora Bhomiyaji Nagar' is indicative of local name of one
Shivnath Singh, who is great grandfather of Manohar Singh - the
donor of the land for creation of center of village in Khasra No.
353, who after his death is considered as local deity in the name
of 'Bhomiyaji'.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners argued that the basic
amenities could not be developed on land of Khasra No. 407 as
earlier proposed however, development on the present land which
has been proposed and being donated by Manohar Singh is though
permissible, but the same has been donated only with an intention
to create new revenue village in the name of his great
grandfather.
3. Learned counsel further argued that the issue involved in the
present case is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court in
[2025:RJ-JD:24916] (3 of 4) [CW-7763/2025]
the case of Moola Ram vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B.
Civil Writ Petition No. 3470/2025) decided on 18.02.2025 and
the judgment dated 08.05.2025 rendered in the case of Joga
Ram & Anr. vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ
Petition No. 7275/2025.
4. Mr. Yogesh Sharma, learned counsel for the respondents
submitted that the name 'Bhomiyaji' is not suggestive of name of
great grandfather of the donor of the land, but it is a common
name. He submitted that petitioners' contention that said Manohar
Singh has donated the land in order to ensure that the revenue
village is created in his great grandfather's name is unfounded.
5. Mr. Sharma further submitted that the petitioners' contention
that the land being donated by Manohar Singh is having charge of
the bank, which has advanced loan to said Manohar Singh is
unsustainable in view of the subsequent development, inasmuch
as, said Manohar Singh has cleared the loan which he had taken
and the bank has issued No Dues Certificate.
6. In rejoinder, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted
that there is specific pleading taken by the petitioners in Para No.9
of the memo of writ petition, but the same was not satisfactorily
responded by the department. He argued that the name of
'Bhomiyaji' is indicative of the name of a local deity and therefore,
the revenue village cannot be created in such name.
7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of
the view that the name of revenue village 'Dhora Bhomiyaji Nagar'
is indicative of deity 'Bhomiyaji' and therefore, it is impermissible
in law in light of the Circular dated 20.08.2009 and the judgment
of this Court rendered in the case of Moola Ram (supra).
[2025:RJ-JD:24916] (4 of 4) [CW-7763/2025]
8. The notification dated 26.03.2025 to the extent of creation
of new revenue village in the name of 'Dhora Bhomiyaji Nagar' is,
hereby, quashed.
9. The State shall be free to rename the village in accordance
with law without undertaking fresh exercise (as required by the
Circular dated 20.08.2009).
10. The center of the revenue village shall nevertheless be
created in Khasra No. 353 in relation whereof all the joint
khatedars have given no objection while earmarking the land in
revenue map.
11. The writ petition stands disposed of.
12. Stay application also stands disposed of, accordingly.
(DINESH MEHTA),J
293-Mak/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
