N.N.MATHUR, J. - (1.) This miscellaneous application, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed for re-hearing of D.B. Civil Appeal No. 134/1985 decided on 26-10-1989 afresh on merit. The say of the applicant is that as per the direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India dated 20-9-1990, passed in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 4769/1990 the case is to be re-heard and finally disposed of on the points urged before this Court and in Special Leave to Appeal before Supreme Court. On 26th April, 2000, when the miscellaneous application came up for final hearing, Mr. B. S. Bhati appearing for the respondents invited our attention towards the order of the Supreme Court dt. 20th September, 1990 and submitted that no direction has been given for rehearing. It was also urged that unless the earlier order dated 26-10-89 of the Division Bench finally deciding the appeal is recalled, the applicant cannot be heard on the points formulated in the application. Mr. Bhati also submitted that there is no prayer for reviewing or recalling of the judgment of the Division Bench dt. 26-10-1989. To meet with the said contention, the application has been filed under Article 226 read with Order 6, Rule 17 and S. 151, C.P.C. for amendment of the Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 68/91 incorporating the prayer : "that decision of the D.B. Civil Appeal No. 134/85 decided on 26-10-90 may be recalled/reviewed. The application was rejected by our order dt. 4-5-2000 for the reasons to be stated while disposing of the instant miscellaneous application.
(2.) For the proper appreciation of the controversy, few relevant background facts are stated as follows :- Applicant Narpat Singh filed a writ petition before this Court claiming himself to be the owner of the agricultural land comprised in Khasra No. 1349 in village Jalore measuring 170 Bigha and 4 Biswa on the basis of gift made in his favour by the Former Ruler of Jodhpur State in the year 1969. However, the Collector, Jalore by order dt. 11th July, 1972 issued a direction to the Tehsildar to take possession of the aforesaid land. The said direction was challenged by the applicant. It revealed that the land in question was originally used for the purpose of aerodrome and contained air strip. The learned single Judge rejected the writ petition having found that the rights, title and interest of the land owner namely the Former Ruler of Jodhpur in the agricultural land in question vested in the State Government as on April 1, 1965 by virtue of Section 7-A of the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Acquisition of Land Owners Estate Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") and all transfers of an estate liable to acquisition, made by the land owner on or after the date of vesting are null and void. Thus, the learned single Judge held that the alleged transaction of gift by the Former Ruler of Jodhpur State in December, 1969 is null and void in view of the provisions of Section 7-A(ii) of the Act. The learned single Judge held that the Collector was justified in directing the Tehsildar to take possession of the land in dispute which has vested in the State Government in accordance with the provisions of the Act.
(3.) A special appeal under Ordinance 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949 was preferred against the aforesaid judgment of the learned single Judge dated 13-10-83. The appeal was presented by Shri J. P. Joshi and Shri M. R. Singhvi. In April, 1989, three applicants namely Kundanmal, Mangilal and Jeetmal all sons of Rikhab Chand Jain filed an application through Shri K. N. Joshi and Shri Rajesh Joshi Advocate with a prayer to implead them as party in the appeal or in alternate they may be permitted to participate as interveners. It was averred that the appellant Narpat Singh has entered into an agreement with them on certain terms and conditions for transfer of the subject land. It was further averred that the appellant Narpat Singh in addition to agreement has also executed a power of attorney in their favour to participate and look after his interest in the proceedings before the High Court. However, it appears that no order was passed on the said application permitting three applicants i.e. Kundan Mal Jain, Mangi Lal and Jeet Mal to be added as party in the appeal or permitting them to intervene in the appeal. Thus, Kundanmal Jain and two brothers were nobody in the appeal and so as there was no question of appearance of learned Counsel Shri K. N. Joshi and Shri Rajesh Joshi in the said special appeal. It appears that at the final stage of hearing of the appeal, Shri K. N. Joshi appeared for the appellant. The Division Bench after hearing Shri K. N. Joshi for the appellant and Dr. S. S. Bhandawat, Additional Advocate General, dismissed the appeal by judgment dt. 26-10-1989.;