SURESH KUMAR Vs. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition a challenge has been laid to an internal correspondence between Director Local Bodies, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur and Chief Executive Officer, Nagar Palika, Surajgarh under letter dated 31st October, 2012 whereby the Director, in respect of a transaction pertaining to the property of one late Kedar Nath Lakhiprasad and mutation thereof in the name of the petitioner has required the Executive Officer to take proceedings for cancellation of the mutation, entered in the name of the petitioner in records of the municipality before the appropraite court.

(2.) MR . M.M. Ranjan Sr. Counsel with Mr. H.S. Khandelwal appearing for the petitioner would submit that under the said correspondence, the conclusions of the Director, Local Bodies, with regard to fraudulent nature of the transaction purportedly engaged into by the petitioner in respect of the property of late Kedar Nath Lakhiprasad – a house/haveli in Ward No. 15 Surajgarh Town, District Jhunjhunu, are without any lawful basis and vitiated on the ground of being arrived at without notice to the petitioner. He submits that if in compliance with the aforesaid correspondence dated 31st October, 2012 misguided, vexatious and frivolous proceedings are taken against the petitioner with regard to his current ownership of the property of late Kedar Nath Lakhiprasad lawfully purchased for valuable consideration by way of registered sale deed, the petitioner would be greatly prejudiced. It is therefore, prayed that the order dated 31st October, 2012 is liable to be quashed and set aside.

(3.) TO my mind the letter dated 31st October, 2012 is merely in the nature of an internal correspondence between the Director Local Body, Government of Rajasthan and Chief Executive Officer, Nagar Palika, Surajgarh. No rights of the petitioner are affected by the said correspondence. The mere direction to lay a suit against the petitioner for cancellation of the mutation in his name in the records of the municipality or even otherwise of the entire transaction relating to purchase by the petitioner of the property of late Kedar Nath Lakhiparasad does not infringe with the petitioner's right.