SMT. SHANTI DEVI WIFE OF SHRI BHAKHAR RAM, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, BY CASTE BISHNOI, RESIDENT OF KANDHI KI DHANI, TEHSIL GUDA MALANI, DISTRICT BARMER Vs. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS THROUGH DISTRICT COLLECTOR,BARMER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All the above-mentioned writ petitions shall stand decided by a common order as the issue involved is identical. For convenience, the facts are being taken from S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8148/2012.

(2.) The prayer in the present writ petition is to set aside the order dated 20.06.2012 passed by the District Collector, Barmer vide which he has cancelled the Patta issued in favour of the petitioners. Patta was issued to the petitioner on 20.12.2008 (Annex.1) by the Gram Panchayat for the land measuring 1500 sq. feet under the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996. The respondent No.3 filed a complaint/revision petition before the District Collector, Barmer for cancellation of Patta issued in favour of the petitioner on 20.10.2010 alleging that the Patta was issued to the petitioner in a fraudulent manner and in violation of the provisions laid down under the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 and Rules of 1996. Notices were issued to the petitioner and Gram Panchayat on 22.10.2010. The Gram Panchayat did not appear despite service. However, the District Collector after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, cancelled the Patta vide impugned order dated 20.06.2012.

(3.) While praying for setting aside the impugned order, learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the respondent No.3 has since died and the Gram Panchayat never contested the revision petition and nor filed their reply. No record was produced before the Collector and the Collector arbitrary cancelled the Patta in the absence of the record. The respondent No.2 had himself issued the Patta, hence his statement before the Collector is false on the face of it and thus, the petitioner cannot be punished on account of the non-availability of the record. The Patta was issued under the signatures and seal of the Sarpanch as well as Gram Sewak cum Secretary and therefore, there was no cause or reason to deny the same or not produce the record. At least, the Panchayat Resolution register should have been called and examined by the respondent No.1 for proper adjudication of the case.