Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Sadeek Mohammad vs District Collector ... on 6 October, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:43696]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18656/2025
Sadeek Mohammad S/o Mohammad Hussain Neelgar, Aged
About 48 Years, R/o Gram Panchayat Bhagwanpura, Tehsil
Mandal, District Bhilwara.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. District Collector, Bhilwara
2. Gram Panchayat Bhagwanpura, Through Village
Development Officer Kanhaiyalal Mali, Gram Panchayat
Bhagwanpura, Tehsil Mandal, District Bhilwara
3. Vikas Adhikari Panchayat Samiti Mandal, District Bhilwara
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajesh Choudhary
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Madhav Vyas
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL BENIWAL
Order
06/10/2025
1. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the
order dated 24.06.2025 (Annex.P/5) passed by the learned
District Collector, Bhilwara, whereby the revision petition was
allowed and the 'patta' (Annex.P/1) issued in favour of the
petitioner was cancelled.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that an identical
petition being S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.17509/2025
(Kailash Chandra Mali Vs. District Collector, Bhilwara and
Ors.) has been disposed of by this Court vide order dated
18.09.2025. He further submits that the present petition may also
be decided in the same terms as in the said writ petition.
(Uploaded on 06/10/2025 at 04:07:05 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:43696] (2 of 3) [CW-18656/2025]
3. In case of Kailash Chandra Mali (supra), this Court has
remanded the matter to the District Collector, Bhilwara to decide
the revision afresh. The relevant part of the order reads as
under :-
'5. A bare reading of the impugned judgment dated
24.06.2025 including the operative part of the said
judgment clearly shows that the revisional court has
merely quoted the submissions made in the revision
petition so also in the written submissions filed by the
petitioner. However, no findings have been recorded
as to how the provisions of the Act of 1994 were not
followed in the present case. No factual discussion
has been made nor any reasoning has been assigned
with regard to the market value of the plot so also
the other irregularities, which have been alleged in
the revision petition.
6. In view of the above, this Court has no hesitation
in holding that the impugned order lacks proper
consideration of facts so also lacks rational reasoning.
Accordingly, on this ground alone, writ petition
deserves acceptance and therefore, the same is
allowed. The impugned judgment is hereby quashed
and set aside.
7. The matter is remanded to the District Collector,
Bhilwara to decide the revision petition afresh strictly
in accordance with law after affording opportunity to
all the parties.
8. With the above observations, the writ petition is
disposed of.
9. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand
disposed of.'
4. Learned counsel for the respondents is not in a position to
refute the above submissions made by the learned counsel for the
petitioner, however, submits that a time bound direction be given
to the District Collector, Bhilwara, to decide the revision petition.
5. In view of the submissions made above, the present writ
petition is disposed of. The impugned order dated 24.06.2025 is
quashed and set aside.
6. The matter is remanded to the District Collector, Bhilwara to
decide the revision petition afresh as expeditiously as possible
(Uploaded on 06/10/2025 at 04:07:05 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:43696] (3 of 3) [CW-18656/2025]
strictly in accordance with law after affording opportunity to all the
parties.
7. Stay petition also stands disposed of accordingly.
(SUNIL BENIWAL), J
12-ajayS/-
(Uploaded on 06/10/2025 at 04:07:05 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
