SAPPU BEGUM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners (i) Smt. Sappu Begum widow of late Shri Hanif Khan, (ii) Nazzuddin son of late Shri Hanif Khan and (iii) Gulam Mustafa @ Mustafa son of Late Shri Hanif Khan have filed this petition before this Court on 14. 7. 2000 and prayed for the following reliefs:- " (i) the judgment of the Board of Revenue dated 5. 5. 1995 (Annex. 6) to the extent it held that petitioners are not entitled to be declared as Khatedars of the land, be quashed and set aside; (ii) the judgment/order passed by the Board of Revenue and the Revenue Appellate Authority to the extent that it should be seen that petitioner's possession should be regularised, should be interpreted by this Hon'ble Court to mean that petitioners should be bestowed upon the khatedari rights and respondents be directed to do so; (iii) the order dated 11. 3. 1996 (Annex. 8) and consequential order dated 15. 3. 1996 (Annex. 9) may kindly be quashed and set aside; (iv) the tender notice No. 213 dated 2. 6. 2000 may also be quashed and set aside to the extent it includes the lands of the petitioners and respondent No. 7 may kindly be restrained from carving-out any road from out of the land of the petitioners measuring 27 bighas in khasra No. 381 of village Nagaur; (v) the respondents no. 4 and 6 may kindly be directed to comply with a part of the judgment of Board of Revenue in favour of the petitioners and also to comply with the orders of the State Government dated 10. 6. 1998 (Annex. 18) in their true letters and spirits and to act upon them accordingly; (vi) any other appropriate relief (s) which this Hon'ble High Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may be passed in favour of the petitioners. "

(2.) THE petitioners themselves have stated in para no. 25 of the petition that prior to this they have filed S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2269/96 and the same was withdrawn with liberty to file fresh petition. THErefore, when this matter was called out in the morning, it was thought it fit to call for the papers of earlier writ petition No. 2269/96. On close scrutiny of that file it appears that almost similar prayers were made in the petition and on issuance of notice, detailed reply affidavit was filed by the respondents, wherein, preliminary objections were raised; (i) writ petition was filed by the present petitioners through their power of attorney Shri Shakti Singh and the power of attorney was executed in favour of Shakti Singh on 29. 12. 1992 for the land in question which was purchased by them by registered sale deed dated 4. 2. 94, (ii) the petitioners concealed the material fact from the Court by not disclosing the sale deed dated 4. 2. 1994 as it was disclosed by the private respondents in their affidavit in November, 1996 for impleading them as party respondents in that petition.