BAL KISHAN MOONDRA Vs. STATE OF RAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AFTER having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material placed on record this Court is of the view that the matter does require re-consideration by the Collector concerned and hence, it would be just and proper that without any comments on the merits of the case either way, Case No.56/1996, as earlier decided by the impugned order dated 15.09.1997, be restored to the file of the Collector, Rajsamand.

(2.) AS the matter is proposed to be remitted to the Collector concerned for consideration of the relevant issues, much dilatation on factual aspects does not appear necessary; and it would suffice to notice in brief the relevant background aspects of the matter.

(3.) THE allegation of the petitioner is that the officers concerned, however, for extraneous reasons and pressures, proceeded to prepare the reports about non-functioning of the unit and thereupon the Collector, Rajsamand issued notice to him on 21.05.1996. The petitioner submits that without appreciating his reply to the notice, the Collector proceeded to pass the impugned order on 15.09.1997 purporting to cancel the lease of the land to the extent of 8 bighas 2 biswas and 8 biswansi out of the total land of 9 bighas and 13 biswas as leased out for 99 years for sugar manufacturing unit.