BHAIRONDAN Vs. CHAIRMAN BOARD OF REVENUE RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ application has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to challenge the validity of the order of the Chairman, Board of Revenue for Rajasthan, dated the 9th March, 1964.

(2.) THE brief facts leading to this petition are as follows: - THE houses of the petitioner Bhairondan and non-petitioner No. 3 Pannalal are situated in Mohalla Surana in Bikaner city facting each other and abutting on, and adjacent to, the public street. On 16. 10. 58 Bhairondan (petitioner) presented an application for permission to make certain constructions in his house. THE Municipal Board gave its permission on 8. 11. 58. It was alleged against the petitioner that he had made constructions against the petitioner that he had made constructions against the permission which was given to him. After an enquiry, the Municipal Commissioner, passed an order dated 25/28. 6. 60 to the effect that the stair case, the latrine and the soakpit constructed by the petitioner should be demolished forthwith. It was further ordered that the petitioner had made projections which were not authorised and for which no permission was obtained and, therefore, he made a recommendation to the Board that they should also be ordered to be demolished. Aggrieved by this order, the petitioner filed an appeal to the Municipal Council. While that appeal was pending, he presented another application for compromise to the Municipal Council. THE application was allowed by the President of Municipal Council on 15 9-61 and it was ordered that the offence was compounded on the condition that the petitioner would deposit Rs. 200/- as fine in the municipal treasury on account of the construction carried out without permission within one month from the date of that order. It appears that soon after this order was made, an Administrator was appointed in place of the Municipal Council by the State. THE petitioner's appeal was taken up by him on 16. 1. 62. It was observed by him that the order passed by the Municipal Commissioner on 25/28. 6. 60 stood revoked by the order of the President dated 15. 9. 61 and the appeal had become infructuous. A revision application against this order was filed by respondent No. 3 Pannalal before the Revenue Appellate Authority, Bikaner. It was dismissed by that Authority on 9. 8. 62. THEreafter, he filed another revision application before the Chairman, Board of Revenue. THE learned Chairman allowed the revision application on 9. 3. 64 and quashed the orders of the Revenue Appellate Authority dated 9. 8. 62, of the Administrator dated 16. 1. 62 and of the President, Municipal Council, dated 15. 9. 61. It is against this order that the present writ application is directed.