CHINDRA SINGH Vs. UPPER DISTRICT COLLECTOR HANUMANGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All the above noted writ petitions arise out of a common order dtd. 14/11/2017 passed by Upper District Collector, Hanumangarh in the revision applications preferred by the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 Gurmej Singh and Bhajan Singh, therefore, they are being decided by this common order.

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners were issued ..pattas.. of the land in question way back in the year 1981. He submits that the ..pattas.. of the land were issued by the concerned Gram Panchayat after taking recourse to Rule 266 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj (General) Rules, 1961. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the conditions mentioned in Rule 266 were duly complied with and, therefore, there is no infirmity in the ..pattas.. of the land issued by the concerned Gram Panchayat. He further submits that there is no condition to the effect that for issuance of the patta of the land in question, there should be in existence a house. He, therefore, submits that the finding recorded by learned Revisional Authority vide its order dtd. 14/11/2017 is erroneous. Learned counsel submits that the petitioners are in possession of the land in question since 1981, however, they are being sought to be dispossessed from the land in question on flimsy grounds. He, therefore, prays that the writ petition filed by the petitioners may be allowed and the order impugned dtd. 14/11/2017 passed by the Revisional Authority may be quashed and set aside.