Mahesh Bhagwati, J. - (1.) BY way of the instant writ petition, the Petitioner has sought the following relief: i) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the Respondents be directed to issue amended order in terms of the judgment dated 16.9.1992 passed by the Board of Revenue for Rajasthan, Ajmer. ii) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the Respondents be directed to get conversion charges of 3671.10 sq. yards of land deposited from the Petitioners, at the rate of Rs. 6/ - per sq. yards. iii)By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the Respondents be directed to issue Sanad / lease deed in favour of the Petitioners in the prescribed forms and complete all formalities of the termination of rights and resumption of land and placing the same at the disposal of the Petitioners for its planned development as contemplated by Section 90 -B of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956. iv) Costs of the petition be awarded in favour of the Petitioners.
(2.) THE Petitioners are aggrieved by the inaction of the Respondents in not making the compliance of the judgment dated 16th September, 1992 passed by Board of Revenue and not depositing conversion charges of 3671.10 sq. yards of land at the rate of Rs 6/ - per sq. yards. Having considered the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the Petitioners and carefully perused the impugned order dated 16th September, 1992 passed by the Board of Revenue, it is noticed that the Petitioners have knocked the door of the Court after 20 years for the compliance of the judgment passed by the Board of Revenue. Learned Counsel during arguments submitted that during last 20 years, they were entailed in correspondence with the JDA and other concerned authorities, but the concerned authorities did not bother to comply with the said judgment. I am of the firm view that the Petitioners cannot be permitted to invoke extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court for the compliance of the judgment passed by the Board of Revenue. It is not the executing court and for implementation of any judgment of the Board of Revenue, the Petitioners cannot convert the extraordinary jurisdiction into execution proceedings. The Petitioners failed to explain as to why did they not file the writ petition for a long period of 20 years. No prima -facie case is found to have been made in favour of the Petitioners, hence the writ petition being bereft of any substance deserves to be dismissed in limine and the same stands dismissed accordingly.;