ABDUL QAYYUM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant petition has been filed by the petitioner against the order dt.10.08.2010 (Annx.10) passed by Director, Local Bodies whereby order of cancellation regarding 'patta' dt.24.09.03 (Annx.1) issued in favour of respondent which was cancelled vide order dt.15.09.04 (Annx.4) without affording opportunity of hearing to the respondent, has been set aside with direction to hold inquiry and pass appropriate orders by the authority competent under law.

(2.) It appears from the record that Municipal Council, Makrana issued a 'patta' in favour of the respondent Ikramuddeen on 24.09.03 in khasra no.768/1, as alleged in the petition. However, on objection being raised by the petitioner by way of submitting a representation before the Deputy Director (Regional), Local Bodies, Ajmer, the 'patta' issued in favour of the respondent was cancelled by the authority vide order dt.15.09.04 (Annx.4) and it was directed to hold inquiry in accordance with law, which was challenged by the respondent before the authority under section 300 of the Act. The respondent-1 after taking note of the submissions made that 'patta' which was issued to the respondent-4 has been cancelled by the authority without affording opportunity of hearing and its action being in violation of principles of natural justice, set aside the order dt.15.09.04 cancelling the 'patta' issued to the respondent, vide its order dt.10.08.2010 and liberty has been granted to the parties to adopt the procedure provided under law.

(3.) Counsel taking assistance of the appeal being preferred by the respondent-4 and the factual report which has been placed on record as Annx.9, submits that when the error in issuing 'patta' in favour of the respondent has been admitted by the Municipal Council that it has wrongly been issued, in such circumstances the authority has committed error in setting aside the order dt.15.09.04 (Annx.4). He further submits that after the error being pointed out, holding inquiry and affording opportunity of hearing to the respondent-4 will be nothing but an empty formality and in such circumstances, the order impugned dt.10.08.2010 deserves to be set aside.