Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Virender Morya vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:41742) on 18 September, 2025
Author: Kuldeep Mathur
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
[2025:RJ-JD:41742]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14757/2025
1. Virender Morya S/o Vishnu Kumar Morya, Aged About 48
Years, R/o Village Rohat, Tehsil Rohat, District Pali,
Presently Residing At Bera Wala Mohalla, Bhadwasiya,
Jodhpur, Tehsil Jodhpur, District Jodhpur (Raj.).
2. Vikram Morya S/o Vishnu Kumar Morya, Aged About 54
Years, R/o Village Rohat, Tehsil Rohat, District Pali,
Presently Residing At Bera Wala Mohalla, Bhadwasiya,
Jodhpur, Tehsil Jodhpur, District Jodhpur (Raj.).
3. Vijay Raj Morya S/o Vishnu Kumar Morya, Aged About 45
Years, R/o Village Rohat, Tehsil Rohat, District Pali,
Presently Residing At House No. 11, Bera Wala Was, Ward
No. 60, Jodhpur, Tehsil Jodhpur, District Jodhpur (Raj.).
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of
Revenue, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur
Raj.
2. District Collector, Pali.
3. Sub Division Officer, Rohat, District Pali.
4. Tehsildar, Rohat, District Pali.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Prashant Kacchawaha
For Respondent(s) : -
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
Order
18/09/2025
1. The petitioners were members of the erstwhile Co-operative
Society which has been dissolved on account of being non-
functional.
(Uploaded on 18/09/2025 at 05:03:13 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:41742] (2 of 4) [CW-14757/2025]
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the
petitioners were having Khatedari rights qua the land in their
possession being member of the Society. He added that so far as
dissolution of the society is concerned, they are not aggrieved, but
they are aggrieved because the respondents are not passing
orders of allotment/regularization of land in terms of Rule 20(3) of
The Rajasthan Land Revenue (Allotment of Land for Agricultural
Purposes) Rules, 1970 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules of
1970).
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the issue
involved in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the
judgment dated 13.05.2025 passed in a bunch of writ petitions led
by Jugal Kishor Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. : S.B. Civil Writ
Petition No.5346/2025.
4. The petitioners have approached this Court with a grievance
that the application which they have filed before the concerned
Sub Divisional Officer/Collector is pending and though some steps
have been taken up but the same have not yet been finalized and
in the meantime the Tehsildar has initiated proceedings under
section 91 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 (hereinafter
referred to as 'the Act of 1956') and is hell bent to evict them
treating them to be an encroacher.
5. Learned counsel submitted that if the Tehsildar dispossess
the petitioners in furtherance of the proceedings under Section 91
of the Act of 1956, not only the petitioners will be rendered
landless but also their rights to get allotment/regularization in
terms of Rule 20(3) of the Rules of 1970 will be severely impaired.
(Uploaded on 18/09/2025 at 05:03:13 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:41742] (3 of 4) [CW-14757/2025]
6. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that once the
Co-operative Society has been dissolved, its members have no
right to continue with the possession of the land and to cultivate
the same. He submitted that petition be therefore, dismissed. He,
however, did not dispute the position that the petitioners have
moved application under Rule 20(3) of the Rules of 1970.
7. Learned counsel for the respondents was, however, not in a
position to dispute the aforesaid position as has been held by this
Court in the case of Jugal Kishor (supra).
8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon
consideration of sub-rule (3) of Rule 20 of the Rules of 1970, this
Court is of the view that petitioners have a right of getting
allotment of the land being member of the dissolved Co-operative
Society. If they are rejected from their possession, their right of
allotment under Rule 20(3) of the Rules of 1970 will be
jeopardized for want of possession.
9. The writ petition is, therefore, disposed of while directing the
District Collector before whom the application for allotment is said
to be pending to expeditiously consider the same in accordance
with law. It shall be required of the Tehsildar being member of the
Land Advisory Committee to conduct a survey and send his report
to the concerned Sub-Divisional Officer, who shall thereafter make
a recommendation for allotment of land to the District Collector in
accordance with law.
10. It shall be required of the District Collector to complete the
above exercise within a period of six months from today.
11. In case the District Collector or the competent authority is of
the opinion that the land cannot be allotted to the petitioners, he
(Uploaded on 18/09/2025 at 05:03:13 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:41742] (4 of 4) [CW-14757/2025]
shall pass speaking order under intimation to the petitioners
against which their rights to seek legal remedies shall stand
reserved.
12. In case, the petitioners are found entitled for the allotment,
requisite order shall necessarily be passed within the aforesaid
period of six months.
13. The petitioners shall not be dispossessed until their
application for allotment under sub-rule (3) of Rule 20 of the Rules
of 1970 is decided.
14. The respondents - State shall not create third party rights
qua the land in petitioner's possession.
15. Stay application also stands disposed of accordingly.
(KULDEEP MATHUR),J
1-divya/-
(Uploaded on 18/09/2025 at 05:03:13 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
