NAGA RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) NOTICE to the respondents.

(2.) LEARNED counsel Mr. C.L. Jain, who appeared before the learned Single Judge for the respondents, who was present in the Court, was directed to accept notice for the respondents.

(3.) THE appellants are the original petitioners. They were allotted lands in question way back on 28.12.75 under the Rajasthan Land Revenue (Allotment of the Land for Agriculture Purposes) Rules, 1970 (for short 'the Rules') - Some disgruntle elements made a complaint about the allotment of lands made to the appellants before the Collector, Sirohi on the ground that they were minors at the time of allotment. After issuing show cause notice to them to show cause as to why the allotment in theirFavour should not be cancelled, the same was cancelled by the Collector by his order dated 7.8,1978. The complaint was made on another count also namely, that they have committed breach of the terms of allotment in as much as they have not cultivated 50% of the lands in question in the first year of allotment. Before the Collector, both the appellants specifically contended that they were not minors at the time of allotment as they were above age of 18. According to them, the appellant no. 1 was born on 3.10.54 and the appellant no. 2 on 17.5.57. Thus, on the date of allotment, both of them were above 18. In support of their case, they have produced their respective horoscopes before the Collector. The Collector, Sirohi in turn conducted enquiry through S.D.O. regarding their birth dates. The S.D.O. submitted his report along with certified copy of the certificates issued by the school where both the petitioners were admitted. According to their school certificates, their dates of birth were 12.7.59 and 20.10.60 respectively. Considering the relevant material placed before him, the Collector gave preference to the School leaving certificates rather than horoscopes produced by them on the ground that they were not bearing any signatures. He also found that the petitioners have committed breach of allotment conditions inasmuch as they did not cultivate atleast 50% of land in the first year of allotment. Accordingly, the said allotment orders dt. 28.12.75 were set aside on 7.8.78. The same was challenged before Revenue appellate Authority and then before the Board of Revenue without any success. Therefore, the Appellants filed Writ Petition no. 4213/96 before this Court which was dismissed by the learned Single Judge on 16.11.2000. Hence, this special appeal.