Ajay Rastogi, J. - (1.) Instant petition is directed against the revisional order passed by the Board of Revenue dt.25.08.2010 pursuant to which the order passed by the Land Settlement Officer, Ajmer dt.01.02.1991 was set aside and the order of allotment made in favour of respondents-2-4 herein, dt.26.09.1971 was restored.
(2.) It will be relevant to record that only question which arose for consideration before the Board of Revenue was as to whether letter of allotment dt.26.09.1971 could have been cancelled by the authority after 20 years vide order dt.01.02.1991 without affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the person concerned upon whom right was vested in terms of the letter of allotment. However, the Board of Revenue in its order impugned observed that after the allotment was made legal right was created which could not have been divested by the State or its authorities by passing order of cancellation dt.01.02.1991 without affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the concerned allottee and such action was held to be in violation of principles of natural justice. It has been informed to this Court that pending proceedings before the Board of Revenue in the instant case, notice U/s 14(4) of the Rajasthan Land Revenue (Allotment of Land for Agricultural Purposes) Rules,1970 issued by the District Collector, Ajmer dt.01.10.2007 came to be issued which is pending adjudication and the present respondents-2-5 are the successors and purchasers over the property in question which was initially allotted to Ram Gopal who was original allottee and in whose favour allotment was made on 26.09.1971.
(3.) The respondents-2-5 have filed joint reply to the writ petition and in para-2 whereof it has been specifically averred that by common order allotment of 7 persons/ allottees was cancelled by the Land Settlement Officer, Ajmer vide order dt.01.02.1991 and all of them preferred their respective revision petitions before the Board of Revenue and the order of cancellation dt.01.02.1991 being common in all 7 matters the Board of Revenue decided revision petitions by separate orders but in none of them writ petition came to be filed by the State of Rajasthan but the State has chosen to file writ petition against the order of the Board of Revenue passed in the case of present respondents-2-5 and there appears to be no justification for it.;