TILOKA RAM Vs. BOARD OF REVENUE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two writ petitions are directed against a common order dt. 28.04.1997 passed by the Board of Revenue, Rajasthan dismissing the revision petitions preferred by the petitioners against the order dt. 16.09.1994 passed by the Revenue Appellate Authority (in short 'RAA'), Bikaner. By order dt. 16.09.1994, RAA has affirmed the order dt. 19.12.1988 passed by the Assistant Commissioner Colonisation, IGNP, Chhattargarh cancelling the allotment made in favour of the petitioners and directing to hand over the possession of the land in question to the respondent No. 4 Smt. Barji Devi.

(2.) THE background facts in nutshell are that the petitioner Tiloka Ram was allotted the land situated in Chak No. 2 KJD(A) in Murabba No. 120/3 bearing Kila No. 1 to 20 on permanent basis in the year 1976. The petitioner applied for allotment of land measuring 5 bighas of Kila No. 21 to 25 adjoining to his land as small patch. The land was allotted in favour of the petitioner vide order dt. 11.01.1988 passed by the Allotting Authority. The petitioner deposited the amount in terms of the allotment order and possession of the land was handed over to him. However, vide order dt. 19.12.1988 passed by the Assistant Commissioner Colonisation, Chhattargarh, the allotment made in favour of the petitioner was cancelled without giving him an opportunity of hearing, on the ground that the land in question already stands allotted to one Smt. Barji widow of Ramsukh on permanent basis.

(3.) AGGRIEVED by the aforesaid orders dt. 19.12.1988, the petitioners preferred separate appeal before the RAA, Bikaner. The learned RAA vide order 16.09.1994 held that the lands in question had already been allotted to Smt. Barji on permanent basis and allotment made in her favour was never cancelled therefore, the orders dt. 19.12.1988 passed by the Allotting Authority cancelling the allotment after issuing notice to the parties and due inquiry cannot be faulted with. The learned RAA held that even if it is assumed that the notice issued by the Allotting Authority was not served upon the petitioners then too, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, it does not make any difference inasmuch as, had the opportunity being granted to the petitioners, the ultimate decision of the Allotting Authority would have been the same. The RAA arrived at the finding that simply because the served notice is not available on file, it cannot be said that the order has been passed without giving an opportunity of hearing to the persons affected. The RAA found that without cancellation of allotment made in favour of Smt. Barji could not have been allotted to any other person even if the land was shown to be 'Rakba Raj' in the Revenue Record.