R.S. Chauhan, J. - (1.) Mr. Shailender Balwada, for the Petitioners.
(2.) The Petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 20.05.2010, passed by the Civil Judge (Lower Division), Srimadhopur, District Sikar, whereby the learned Magistrate has rejected the Petitioners' objection application dated 16.11.2009 against the Commissioner's report dated 11.11.2009 and application dated 02.04.2010 for appointment of Nayab Tehsildar, Khandela as Commissioner.
(3.) It is the case of the Petitioners' that vide order dated 11.11.2009, the learned Magistrate had appointed Mr. Kamal Kishore Verma, Advocate, as a Commissioner. It is further their case that although the parties were present on 11.11.2009 at the site, although the Petitioner No. 1 had signed the "Fard Mauka", but the fact remains that the report was prepared behind her back. In fact, the report which was prepared before her has not been submitted by the Commissioner. Instead, another report, which was prepared behind her back, has been submitted before the Court. They further claim that the report so submitted before the Court is confusing in its contents. Hence, the Petitioners had filed their objection application on 16.11.2009 and had further prayed that the learned Magistrate under police protection should inspect the site. Subsequently, they had also filed an application dated 02.04.2010 praying that the Nayab Tehsildar, Khandela should be appointed as a Commissioner. However, vide order dated 20.05.2010, the learned Magistrate has rejected both the applications dated 16.11.2009 and 02.04.2010. Hence, this petition before this Court.;