[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Bahadur Singh vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 29 January, 2026
[2026:RJ-JD:5245-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 1504/2018
1. Bahadur Singh S/o Shri Arjun Singh, Aged About 40
Years, By Caste Rajput, Village Ubali, Gada Mertiya, Tehsil
Galiyakot, District Dungarpur (Rajasthan)
2. Rajendra Singh S/o Shri Pratap Singh, Aged About 45
Years, By Caste Rajput, Village Ubali, Gada Mertiya, Tehsil
Galiyakot, District Dungarpur (Rajasthan)
3. Bharat Singh S/o Shri Roop Singh, Aged About 70 Years,
By Caste Rajput, Village Ubali, Gada Mertiya, Tehsil
Galiyakot, District Dungarpur (Rajasthan)
4. Mahendra Singh S/o Shri Arjun Singh, Aged About 45
Years, By Caste Rajput, Village Ubali, Gada Mertiya, Tehsil
Galiyakot, District Dungarpur (Rajasthan)
5. Savaji S/o Shri Haliya, Aged About 52 Years, By Caste
Adiwasi, Village Ubali, Gada Mertiya, Tehsil Galiyakot,
District Dungarpur (Rajasthan)
6. Deva S/o Shri Fakira, Aged About 45 Years, By Caste
Yadav, Village Ubali, Gada Mertiya, Tehsil Galiyakot,
District Dungarpur (Rajasthan)
7. Jitendra Singh S/o Shri Balbhadra Singh, Aged About 28
Years, By Caste Rajput, Village Ubali, Gada Mertiya, Tehsil
Galiyakot, District Dungarpur (Rajasthan)
8. Amariya S/o Shri Kuriya Yadav, Aged About 60 Years, By
Caste Yadav, Village Ubali, Gada Mertiya, Tehsil Galiyakot,
District Dungarpur (Rajasthan)
9. Khema S/o Shri Chokha, Aged About 72 Years, By Caste
Chamar, Village Ubali, Gada Mertiya, Tehsil Galiyakot,
District Dungarpur (Rajasthan)
10. Raghuveer Singh S/o Shri Bhagwan Singh, Aged About 62
Years, By Caste Rajput, Village Ubali, Gada Mertiya, Tehsil
Galiyakot, District Dungarpur (Rajasthan)
11. Dalpat Singh S/o Shri Naru, Aged About 65 Years, By
Caste Daroga, Village Ubali, Gada Mertiya, Tehsil
Galiyakot, District Dungarpur (Rajasthan)
12. Ajit Singh S/o Shri Bhagwan Singh, Aged About 40 Years,
By Caste Rajput, Village Ubali, Gada Mertiya, Tehsil
Galiyakot, District Dungarpur (Rajasthan)
(Uploaded on 30/01/2026 at 11:47:59 AM)
(Downloaded on 30/01/2026 at 04:51:29 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:5245-DB] (2 of 4) [SAW-1504/2018]
13. Moti Singh S/o Shri Roop Singh, Aged About 75 Years, By
Caste Rajput, Village Ubali, Gada Mertiya, Tehsil
Galiyakot, District Dungarpur (Rajasthan)
----Appellants
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,
Revenue, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur
2. District Collector, Dungarpur
3. Sub Divisional Officer, Sagwara, District- Dungarpur
(Rajasthan)
4. Sub Divisional Officer, Galiyakot, District Dungarpur
(Rajasthan)
5. Chief Engineer, Mahi Sagar Project (Rehabilitation),
Banswara (Rajasthan)
6. Assistant Engineer, Bheekha Bhai Nahar Sagwara, Sub
Division-Ii, Mahi Project, Sagwara, District- Dungarpur
(Rajasthan)
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Shambhoo Singh Rathore
For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Rajpurohit, AAG with
Ms. Aditi Sharma
HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU
Order
29/01/2026
1. The challenge in this special appeal is the order passed by
the learned Single Judge dated 13.07.2018, whereby the learned
Single Judge has observed that there is a remedy as per the land
revenue law for claiming regularization or adverse possession.
2. This Court after issuing notices directed the State to file a
reply. It would be apposite to quote the contents of the reply for
the purpose of adjudication of this case.
(Uploaded on 30/01/2026 at 11:47:59 AM)
[2026:RJ-JD:5245-DB] (3 of 4) [SAW-1504/2018]
"3. That at this juncture, it would be pertinent to
submit here that the petitioners are residing in
khasra no.665 of Revenue Village Ubli, Patwar Mandal
Gadmertiya, Tehsil Galiyakot, District Dungarpur. The
petitioners, besides various other displaced persons,
were provided land in the aforesaid khasra for
residential purposes and the petitioners are having
their constructed houses at the said place almost
since late seventies. Besides the petitioners, various
other displaced persons were also given requisite
land / plot in the said khasra and they are also
residing their in constructed houses. it would be
pertinent to submit here that it was not the case of
the petitioners that the pattas issued to them have
ever been cancelled or revoked and further it was
also not the case of the petitioners that any
proceedings for their eviction from the plots situated
in khasra no.665 (detailed above) have ever been
initiated. Thus, in the aforesaid background, the
claims of petitioners were responded by way of
allotting residential plots upon which the petitioners
constructed their houses and are residing till date to
the best of information available to the answering
respondents. Therefore, the occasion of seeking
second time allotment of residential plots never arose
before the petitioners.
5. That notwithstanding aforesaid factual position,
the petitioners moved applications before the
committee headed by Sub-Divisional Officer,
Sagwaraand sought allotment of residential plots in
Punarwas Colony. Sagwara. The petitioners neither
filed copies of the awards made regarding their lands
which submerged in Kadana Backward Flow Area nor
did they reveal the fact of them being in possession
of land in khasra no.665, village Ubli, upon which
they already got constructed houses. In absence of
the requisite document in the form of award, the
applications were rejected. The petitioners did not
move before the authority seeking allotment of
alternative land and rather concealed the fact of them
having possession and constructed houses pursuant
to their pattas in khasra no.665 of village Ubli. It is
not just the petitioners who are settled and residing
in khasra no.665, village Ubli but various other
displaced persons are also settled there. Out of the
total lot which settled at khasra no.665, village Ubli,
probably it is only these 13 petitioners who
proceeded in the direction of once again seeking
allotment and that too in a particular colony namely:
Punarwas Colony, Sagwara. The petitioners concealed
(Uploaded on 30/01/2026 at 11:47:59 AM)
[2026:RJ-JD:5245-DB] (4 of 4) [SAW-1504/2018]
all these material facts even while filing the instant
writ petition. Be that as it may, all these existing
facts as well as various disputed questions of facts
are involved in the matter and therefore, the order
impugned is well justified as the same gives due
liberty to the petitioners to avail appropriate remedy
in accordance with law.
6. That it would be pertinent to submit here that
residential houses by displaced persons have been
constructed upon the lands given in possession to
such persons pursuant to the pattas allotted.
Photographs showing google image etc. are brought
on record as Annexure R-1."
3. No rejoinder has been filed and the contents of the reply
have not been denied.
4. We are, therefore, of the firm view that so far as petitioners
are concerned, they have already been settled in Khasra No.665 of
the village and they have not been subsequently displaced.
5. In view thereto, there is no occasion for claiming any second
allotment of the residential plots. We, therefore, are satisfied that
no case is made out by the writ petitioners for claiming a fresh
allotment.
6. Accordingly, the Special Appeal Writ is dismissed.
(BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU),J (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),ACJ
40-Hanuman/Deepak/-
(Uploaded on 30/01/2026 at 11:47:59 AM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
