BISHNA RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of INdia, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 22. 7. 1993 passed by the Board of Revenue by which the appeal filed by the respondent no. 5 was allowed and allotment of land made in favour of the petitioner was cancelled.

(2.) BRIEF relevant facts of the case are that the respondent no. 4 i. e. the Assistant Colonisation Commissioner, Suratgarh vide his order dated 21. 4. 1984 allotted 13 Bighas of land to the petitioner. The respondent no. 5 filed a complaint to the respondent no. 4 stating that the petitioner has obtained allotment of land by concealing material facts and as such the allotment be cancelled. After inquiry the respondent no. 4 vide his order dated 17. 10. 1985 came to the conclusion that at the time when the allotment was made, the petitioner was holding 24 Bighas and 4 Biswas of land. He was of the view that the petitioner concealed these facts and on this ground, he cancelled the allotment of the disputed land in favour of the petitioner. Being aggrieved with the aforesaid order of the Respondent No. 4, the petitioner filed an appeal before the respondent no. 3 who vide under dated 21. 2. 86 held that the petitioner was holding 18 Bighas and 12 Biswas of land on 21. 4. 84. He remanded the case to the Assistant Colonisation Commissioner, Suratgarh. Against the aforesaid order, the respondent no. 5 filed a revision before the Board of Revenue. The Board of Revenue vide its order dated 22. 7. 1993 allowed the revision and cancelled the allotment of land in favour of the petitioner only on the ground that the petitioner was guilty of concealment. This order has been challenged in this writ petition by the petitioner. Counsel for the petitioner argued that there was no deliberate act of concealment on the part of the petitioner but it was a case of omission which does not affect the allotment. Even it be taken that the petitioner was holding some land, the petitioner was entitled for allotment of the land for which the order was passed by the respondent no. 4 on 21. 4. 1984. In support of his argument, counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on a judgment passed by this Court in D. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1738/82, Makhan Singh vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. , decided on 06. 1. 1992 (1 ). We have gone through the said judgment. The facts mentioned in that case are totally distinguishable and are not relevant to the facts of the present case. In that case the petitioner was allotted agricultural land for cultivation on temporary lease basis in the year 1970. The tenancy was renewed from year to year until the land was permanently allotted in favour of the petitioner vide order dated 31. 1. 1974. Prior to this, the petitioner purchased a piece of land. That was a case of converting temporary lease on permanent basis and was prior to the coming into force of the Rajasthan Colonisation (Allotment and Sale of Government Land in the Rajasthan Canal Colony Area) Rules, 1975. Rule 21 of the said rules read as below : - "21. Cancellation of allotment - If at any time it is discovered that any allotment of Government land was made under these rules upon an incorrect statement of facts made in the application or in the affidavit or any other document produced by an allottee the Allotting Authority, may order cancellation of such allotment and may also order re-entry upon and taking possession of the land without payment of any compensation; Provided that no such order shall be made without giving the person, likely to be affected thereby, an opportunity of being heard. "