GOPAL S/O ARJUN Vs. SUKH SINGH S/O SHRI HAMEER SINGH BY CASTE RAJPUT R/O VILLAGE GAIJEE, TEHSIL DUDU, DISTRICT JAIPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant intra-court appeal has been filed against order of the ld. Single Judge dated 07.08.2000.

(2.) The proceedings, impugned in the writ petition, preferred u/Art.226 and 227 of the Constitution at the instance of the present appellant, are arising from the Ceiling proceedings. It was alleged in the writ petition that in the case under the Agricultural Ceilings Act pending before the SDO, Sambhar entitled State of Rajasthan v. Hameer Singh , surplus agricultural land was acquired by the State including Khasra No. 888 measuring 11 bighas and 1 biswas on 16.01.1976 and this land was surrendered by the land holder and was recorded as 'siwai chak' land and the same was allotted to the appellant on 28.01.1976 and since then, he was in possession of the subject land in question and was also declared as 'gair khatedar' and according to him, no appeal/revision was preferred and the order dated 28.01.1976, pursuant to which the subject land in question was allotted to him became final and after six months on 28.06.1976, the application was filed by Sukh Singh (now deceased) before the SDO praying that in place of Khasra No. 888, their other lands comprising of Khasra Nos.836 and 912 may be acquired. On their application, the SDO cancelled the allotment of the said Khasra No. 888 in favour of the appellant vide his order dated 24.06.1996 and this is the reason pursuant to which proceedings were initiated regarding cancellation impugned at the instance of the appellant dispossessing him from the subject land in question, who was holding the title after the subject land in question was declared as 'siwai chak' and allotted vide order dated 28.01.1976. The matter travelled upto the Board of Revenue and order dated 23.03.2000, passed by the Board of Revenue, was the subject matter of challenge in the writ petition filed at the instance of the present appellant before the ld. Single Judge u/Art.226 and 227 of the Constitution.

(3.) The main thrust of submission of counsel for appellant is that neither the narration of facts nor their submissions have been considered by the ld. Single Judge and their writ petition has been dismissed by a cryptic order impugned dated 07.08.2000 and the procedure followed in rejecting the writ petition is a clear denial of the principles of natural justice, which is minimal expected by a litigant who approaches the court of law with a hope that his grievance raised at least will get indulgence by the court, apart from the question which is to be considered on merits.