Aadu Ram vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:24294)
2025 Latest Caselaw 9923 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Aadu Ram vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:24294) on 20 May, 2025

Author: Dinesh Mehta

Bench: Dinesh Mehta

[2025:RJ-JD:24294]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7517/2025

Aadu Ram S/o Rama Ram, Aged About 48 Years, R/o Fehrani Sarno Ka Talan, Gram Panchayat Kosalu, Tehsil Sindhari, District Balotra (Raj.).

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary To The Government, Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

2. The District Collector, Balotara.

3. Sub-Divisional Officer, Sindhari, District Balotara.

4. Tehsildar, Sindhari, District Balotra.

5. Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Kosalu, Tehsil Sindhari, District Balotara.

                                                                      ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)              :     Mr. D.L.R. Vyas
For Respondent(s)              :     Mr. Yogesh Sharma for
                                     Mr. S.S. Ladrecha, AAG



                          JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

                                          Order

20/05/2025

1. Learned counsel submitted that the issue involved in the

present writ petition is squarely covered by judgment dated

18.02.2025 passed by co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case

of Moola Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Civil Writ Petition

No.3470/2025) and observations made by this Court in the case

of Joga Ram & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil

Writ Petition No.7275/2025), decided on 08.05.2025.

2. Following the reasoning given in the cases of Moola Ram and

Joga Ram (supra), the present writ petition is allowed.

[2025:RJ-JD:24294] (2 of 2) [CW-7517/2025]

3. The notification dated 26.03.2025 qua revenue village -

'Binjaram Sutharon Ki Dhani' is hereby quashed and set aside.

4. The respondent - State shall, however, be free to create

revenue village in any other name in accordance with law, more

particularly in light of what has been observed in the case of Joga

Ram (supra).

5. It is hereby made clear that the quashment of the

notification dated 26.03.2025 shall not require the State to initiate

the proceedings for the creation of revenue village afresh; only

the proceedings related to the change in name shall be

undertaken.

6. The State shall be free to challenge the name of the revenue

village, however, it shall be incumbent upon the Revenue

Authorities to obtain the consent of the owner of the land - Binja

Ram, prior to effecting any change in the name of the village,

particularly in light of his willingness to voluntarily hand over the

land. In case, the owner - Binja Ram appears to hand over the

land irrespective of the change in the name of the village, then the

centre of the village may be fixed on the land proposed to be

gifted/surrendered by him.

7. The stay application also stands disposed of, accordingly.

(DINESH MEHTA),J 434-akansha/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)