Decided on June 03,1984

NANI BAI Appellant
STATE Respondents

Referred Judgements :-



S.K.MAL LODHA, J. - (1.)THIS appeal under Section 18(1) of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949 has been filed by the unsuccessful petitioner, whose writ petition was dismissed summarily by order dated November 15,1971 of a learned single Judge.
(2.)FOR the sake of convenience, the appellant will be referred to as the petitioner. She filed the writ petition praying that the order (Anx. L) March 24, 1971, cancelling the allotment of the land to her may be. quashed and the respondents (State of Rajasthan, Collector Chitorgarh and Tehsildar, Chittorgarh), may be directed not to dispossess her from the land in question measuring 5 bighas Arazi No. 33/1, situate in village Ochhdi, Tehsil Chittorgarh. Certain other reliefs were also sought. Suffice it to state that the petitioner was allotted 5 bighas Arazi No 33/1 EI, situate in village Ochhadi, tehsil Chittorgarh by order Anx. D of the Additional Collector, Chhittorgarh. After that she executed the agreement Anx. E as required by the Rajasthan Colonisation (Medium and Minor Irrigation' Projects Govt. Lands Allotment) Rules, 1968 (for short (the Rules') and Generel Colonisation Conditions, 1955. A notice Anx. E dated October 16, 1969 was sent to the petitioner by the Additional Collector, Chittorgarh asking her show cause as to why the allotment of the land in question made in her favour be not cancelled, and the proceedings be not initiated for filing false declaration. In the notice, inter alia, it was stated as under - .........[vernacular ommited text]........... The petitioner gave reply Anx. I dated December 19, 1969, stating that no good ground exists for cancelling the allotment of the land in question made in her favour. It was submitted by her that the notice may be cancelled. A further reply to the notice (Anx. J) dated May 28, 1971 was filed by her counsel. The Additional Collector by his order Anx. M, dated January 16, 1970 held that the petitioner as well as her minor son Arvind Kumar were not entitled to the allotment under Rule 5(a) of the Rules read with Section 5(26 -A) and (3) of the Tenancy Act. It was recorded by the Additional Collector that the petitioner is the wife of Bhera Shankar, who is a Patwari in district Jalore and she is not a landless agriculturist. He, there recommended to the State Government to cancel the allotment. The Minister for Colonisation Department, vide order Anx. 1 dated May 24, 1971 cancelled the allotment of the land in question made in favour of the petitioner. In passing the order, the expressed agreement with the finding of the Additional Collector, Chittorgarh to the effect that the petitioner being dependent on a Government servant is not a bonafide agriculturist by profession and as such she was not a landless tenat being eligible for allotment of the land under the Rules. After passing of the order, the Collector, Chittorgarh by his order Anx. K, directed the Tehrildar to cancel the allotment and record the land as 'bitanam Sarkar'. The petitioner, therefore, filed the writ petition for the aforesaid reliefs.
The learned single Judge was of the opinion that the writ petition was not fit for exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. He, therefore, rejected it summarily. Hence this appeal as aforesaid.

(3.)WE have heard Mr. N.P. Gupta for Mr. D.S. Shisodia for the appellant and Mr. R.P. Dave, learned Deputy Govt. Advocate.

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.