KAUSHALYA DEVI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL these five writ petitions involve a similar question of law and fact, therefore, they are disposed of by a common order.

(2.) FOR the convenient disposal of all the writ petitions, the facts given in the case Balkishan Vs. State of Rajasthan S. B. Civil Writ Petition no 791/8. 9 are taken into consideration.

(3.) MR. Jain learned counsel for the respondents strenuously urged before me that this land does not belong to the U. I. T. but it belongs to the Revenue Department and in support thereof MR. Jain has invited my attention to section 92 and section 102 A of the Land Revenue Act. MR. Purohit, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that reference of section 92 and 102 A of the Land Revenue Act has no relevance in the present case. Learned counsel submitted that in the present case a notification was issued by the Government under sub-section (1) of section 3 read with item (x) of sub-section (1) of section 2 of the Rajasthan Urban Improvement Trust Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1959 ).