DEVSI RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and having perused the material placed on record, this Court is unable to find any reason to entertain this writ petition, filed only on 07.11.2009 and essentially directed against the order passed by the Board of Revenue for Rajasthan at Ajmer ('the Board'/'the Board of Revenue') as back as on 06.05.1998.

(2.) An agricultural land comprised in kila Nos. 17 and 24 of Murabba No. 35 at Chak 18AMS admeasuring 2 bighas came to be alloted to the petitioner as a small patch under the Rajasthan Colonisation (Bhakra Project Government Land Allotment and Sale) Rules, 1955 by an order dated 08.07.1994 as issued by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Nohar ('SDO'). This order dated 08.07.1994 was questioned in appeal by the Gram Panchayat, Malkhera through Karnel Singh son of Ram Dayal Singh essentially on the ground that the land comprised in Murabba No. 35 had already been allotted to the Gram Panchayat and the land in question could not have been allotted to the petitioner. By the order dated 29.04.1995, the learned Revenue Appellate Authority, Hanumangarh ('RAA') found the submissions as made by the appellant justified and also found that the Collector, Sriganganagar in his order dated 04.05.1994 had directed the SDO not make any allotment of the land in question as the Gram Panchayat, Malkhera had made an application for mutation in the revenue record while claiming that the land in question had already been allotted to it.

(3.) Aggrieved by the order dated 29.04.1995 as passed by the Revenue Appellate Authority, Hanumangarh, the petitioner preferred a second appeal bearing number L.R./44/95/ Hanumangarh before the Board of Revenue. The Board, by its order dated 06.05.1998, rejected the contentions urged on behalf of the petitioner regarding competence of the appeal before the RAA and delay in filing such appeal with the observations that the RAA had granted the permission for filing the appeal and had decided the same on merits while impliedly condoning the delay. On the merits of the case, the Board found the allotment made by the SDO unjustified being in disobedience of the order issued by the Collector, Sriganganagar on 04.05.1994; and further, that the land in question had been allotted to the Gram Panchayat in the year 1966 but the record could not be corrected for a fire incident in the Tehsil. The Board of Revenue found no case for interference and, while observing that the appellant may take the deposited amount of allotment back, proceeded to dismiss the appeal with the following observations:-