RAM DHAN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL these special appeals emanate from the order of the learned Single Judge dated 4.10.1995 where by 5 writ petitions were dismissed. Since identical questions of fact and law arise, we propose to dispose of these special appeals by this composite judgment.

(2.) THE appellants are residents of village Baget, Gram Panchayat Khudiyala, Panchayat Samiti Dudu, District Jaipur. These 4 appellants and one other person moved applications for grant of Patta of the disputed land in terms of Rule 266 of the Rajasthan Panchayat (General) Rules, 1961 (hereinafter, referred as the Rules') before the Gram Panchayat Khudiyala. While processing the above applications, the Gram Panchayat Khudiyala appointed a committee consisting of some Panchas to inspect the site and submit a report for allotment of the said land. Accordingly, the committee inspected the site and submitted its report on 27.1.1982. The committee stated in the report that auction sale of the proposed land was not possible because the land was uneven and suffered from water logging also. The committee, therefore, clearly opined that instead of auction sale, negotiated allotment would be preferable. The report of the committee has been filed with the appeals and is Ex. 1. The Gram Panchayat Khudiyala accepting the report of the committee and following the entire procedure envisaged in Rule 266 of the said Rules allotted the land as mentioned in para 4 of the appeal to the appellants and each of them was issued a Patta. In accordance with Rule 265 of the said Rules, the aforesaid allotment was sent for confirmation to the Panchayat Samiti. Dudu and the same was granted vide Ex. 2. In the appeal it was stated that there is a provision contained in Rule 270 of the said Rules for preferring an appeal against the allotment made either under Rule 265 or 266 of the said Rules. However, no appeal was filed against the allotment made by the said Gram Panchayat. After allotment the appellants made huge expenditure in improving the land. However, respondent No. 1 invoking provisions of Rule 272 of the said Rules filed a revision petition before the Additional Collector, Jaipur, on 21.7.1992 praying for cancellation of the plots allotted to the appellants. By this revision petition, the Government through the officer -in -charge, Panchayat Collectorate, Jaipur, challenged inter alia the resolutions passed by the Panchayat on 9.4.82, 9.1.83, 9.4.87, 9.5.87 and 23.5.87 by which the plots were allotted to the appellants as also the cancellation of the above plots. This revision petition was filed some 8 years after the allotment of the plots to the appellants. A perusal of the revision petition shows that the allotment of plots was challenged on three grounds viz. (1) no approval of the Panchayat Samiti was obtained : (2) Rule 265(2) of the said Rules was not complied with : and (3) that the land in question was not Abadi land and the Gram Panchayat had no authority to alienate the same. It may be mentioned that the Gram Panchayat made allotment in favour of 5 persons and the total land allotted was 5330 sq. yards. It is also important to note that entire Khasra No. 426 is about 3025 sq. yards and half of which is Garmumkin Kharda and half is Germumkin Abadi. However, the Additional Collector allowed the revision petition and cancelled the allotment made by the Gram Panchayat in favour of the 5 allottees including the appellants.

(3.) THE contention of the appellants is that the allotment was made in the year 1987 and there was only one map showing Khasra No. 426 and its land as Abadi, hence the Gram Panchayat was perfectly justified in making the above allotment to the appellants.