BHARAT PARIYANI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) The present writ petition has been filed with a prayer that the orders passed by the Competent Authorities dtd. 18/11/1996 (Annexure-6), 23/12/1997 (Annexure-7) and communication dtd. 20/12/2000 may be directed to be complied with and regularize the land of the petitioner in conformity with the order passed.

(3.) Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner's father was a freedom fighter and a landless labour. The father of the petitioner was in possession of 2 Bighas 19 Biswas of land, which was developed and improved for agricultural purposes. The possession of the land was taken by the father of the petitioner in Samwat 2022 and in revenue record, it was recorded as Najayaj Kabja. The petitioner remained in continuous possession of the land after the death of his father and still holding the possession till date. In the year 1968, the proceedings under Sec. 91 of the Land Revenue Act were undertaken but the proceedings were dropped and ultimately the possession of the petitioner and his father was not disturbed. The petitioner continued with the possession of the land and filed a petition for regularization of the same in the year 1994 before the Revenue Authorities. Vide order dtd. 17/11/1995, the District Collector, Rajsamand passed an order that the land in question is not fit for regularization. Against the order dtd. 17/11/1995, the petitioner preferred a representation to the State Government and the State Government vide order dtd. 17/1/1996 declined to regularize the land in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner, thereafter, preferred a revision petition under Sec. 85A of the Land Revenue Act before the learned Revenue Minister challenging the order dtd. 17/1/1996 passed by the State Government. The learned Revenue Minister vide order dtd. 18/11/1996 allowed the revision petition and ordered the respondents to regularize the land in favour of the petitioner. The communication to that effect was also made vide order dtd. 6/1/1997. The District Collector vide order dtd. 4/3/1997 sought guidance from the State Government about the regularization of the land in question. The State Government vide communication dtd. 23/12/1997 reiterated the stand taken and directed for regularization of the land in favour of the petitioner. When nothing was done, the petitioner again submitted a representation on 30/8/1999 for compliance of the orders dtd. 18/11/1996 and 6/1/1997. When the order for regularization was not made, one more communication was made by the State Government on 4/9/1999 to the Collector and was reminded for complying with the order passed on 18/11/1996.