NISAR AHMED Vs. RIDH KARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application for revision of the order of the Addl. Commissioner, Jodhpur dated 29-06-1955.

(2.) THE facts of the case are not in dispute. THE only point urged by the learned counsel for the applicant is that under section 17(5) of the Patta Ordinance the land should have been auctioned but instead of doing so the Patta Committee allotted it to the nob-applicant, at the fixed rate and therefore it failed to exercise jurisdiction in deciding the case. I have no hesitation in saying that this argument is simply futile and has no weight. Sec. 17(1) of the Ordinance empowers the authority to grant a patta on payment of the present site value in respect of the unoccupied land. Sec. 17(2) however also lays down that the unoccupied land will be put to auction. Obviously sec. 17(1) is to cover cases in which land lies in the closest vicinity of the applicant who alone will be the best purchaser for such sites and for safeguarding the interest of the purchaser against the frivolous and vexatious bids. THE legislature provided that such lands could be given on payment of present site value. It is clear that in view of these provisions it is always discretionary with the authority as to how to deal with the unoccupied lands. THEre is no case for interfering in revision by the Board. THE result is that the application is rejected.