SHARMA, J. - (1.) THIS is a writ petition under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, filed by Sriram, for issue of a writ of certiorari, or any other appropriate writ, direction or order in the nature thereof, quashing the order of the Additional Collector, Sikar, dated 25th Sept. , '78, cancelling the sale deed, which had been executed in favour of the petitioner by Gram Panchayat Reengus, on 3rd Nov. ,'74.
(2.) THE petitioner is a resident of Reengus Town, in District Sikar. On 30th Aug. , '74, the petitioner made an application to the Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Reengus, stating that there was a piece of land adjoining the north of his 'nohra' and in-front of his house, after leaving the public way. It was stated that the land was in his possession, and a 'patta' at a concessional rate, be granted in his favour in respect of the said land. On 26th Oct. , '74, Geedaram and Govindram, Panchas of the Gram Panchayat, made a site-inspection and measured the plot of land, for which, the petitioner had made the application for grant of a 'patta'. It was found that the measurement of the plot of land was 20' east-west x 18' north-south, and that the land was in possession of the petitioner. THE Panchas reported that even after grant of 'patta' in respect of the said land, there would be no obstruction in the alignment of the houses. THE report of the Panchas is Annexure -3. THE Gram Panchayat issued a notice (Annex. 4) on 30th Aug. , '74, inviting objections against the application of the petitioner for grant of 'patta'. THE matter was decided by the Gram Panchayat by its order dated 3rd Nov. , '74, whereby, the above plot of land was agreed to be sold to the petitioner under Rule 266 (1) (b) of the Rajasthan Panchayat & Nyay Panchayat (General) Rules, 1961, at a concessional rate of Rs. 21-per sq. yd. A sale-deed (Annex. 6) was also executed by the Gram Panchayat in respect of this land, on 3rd Nov. , '74, in favour of the petitioner. It appears that respondents Nos. 4 & 5, by a sale deed dated 5th Jan. , '77, which was registered on 12th Jan. , '77, purchased a vacant land, located on the eastern side of a part of the plot of land which had been sold by the Gram Panchayat to the petitioner. THE case of the respondents Nos. 4 & 5 was that the plot of land sold to the petitioner was a public chowk and public way since long, and that the Gram Panchayat could not have sold the said land of the public-way to the petitioner. It was also the case of respondents Nos. 4 & 5 that the 'patta' had been issued in favour of the petitioner in violation of the rules. It may here be mentioned that the petitioner had also another piece of land measuring 630 sq. yds and 2 sq. feet, in respect of which a 'patta' had been granted in favour of the petitioner by the Gram Panchayat on 16th Nov. , '69. Aggrieved by the two 'pattas' granted by the Gram Panchayat Reengus, in favour of the petitioner, on 16th Nov. , '69 and on 3rd Nov. , '74, respondent No. 4 filed a revision petition before the Additional Collector, Sikar. In respect of the 'pattas' granted by the Gram Panchayat, it was mentioned in the revision petition that it formed part of the public way, and hence, that land could not have been sold. It was also stated that since the plot of land was in front of the house which had been purchased by respondents Nos. 4 & 5, obstruction would be caused in their access to the public way. Violation of the rules was also complained of. The Additional Collector came to the conclusion that the Gram Panchayat had not recorded any reasons, as contemplated by Rule 266 (1) (a) & (b) of the 1961 Rules. He also held that the petitioner was not entitled to grant of Patta. As there existed neither his house near this plot of land, nor was there any reliable evidence about his possession over this land. He also held that by the allotment of the land to the petitioner, the Gram Panchayat had violated the easementary rights of respondents Nos. 4 & 5. The whole proceedings had taken place under secrecy. Nauranglal respondent No. 4 was not given any opportunity of being heard. The Additional Collector, Sikar, therefore, accepted the revision petition filed by Nauranglal, and he set aside the order of the Gram Panchayat dated 3rd Nov. , '74, whereby, the plot of land measuring 42 sq. yds. was sold to the petitioner under the 'patta' dated 3rd Nov. , '74. However, the grant of 'patta' in respect of the land which had been made by the Gram Panchayat to the petitioner on 16th Nov. , '69, was maintained. The petitioner in this writ petition, has challenged the order of the Additional Collector, Sikar, dated 25th Sept. 78, as illegal and without jurisdiction. It is stated by the petitioner that the revision petition filed by respondent No. 4 before the Additional Collector, Sikar, was incompetent as the latter had no jurisdiction to entertain any such revision under Rule 272 of the Panchayat Rules. It is further stated that respondents Nos. 4 & 5 were not aggrieved parties against the aforesaid sale of the piece of land measuring 42 sq. yds. in favour of the petitioner. The respondents had not filed any objections when the same were invited by the Gram Panchayat. They also did not prefer any appeal against the order of the Gram Panchayat, as provided in Rule 270 of the Panchayat Rules. When the patta was granted in favour of the petitioner for the land measuring 42 sq. yds, respondents Nos. 4 & 5 did not have any house or land situated near the plot in question. They had purchased the 'nohra' from Brij Mohan Pareek in the year 1977, and the Gram Panchayat had sold the plot of land to the petitioner on 26th Nov. , '74. The petitioner further states that direct revision without preferring an appeal and that too after expiry of three years, should not have been entertained by the Additional Collector, Sikar, and that the same was barred by limitation. To continue the narration further, it may be mentioned that since the Additional Collector, Sikar, had not disturbed the Patta granted to the petitioner in respect of another plot of land measuring 630 sq. yds. & 2 sq. feet on 16th Nov. , '69, respondents Nos. 4 & 5 had, on 12th Oct. , '83, filed SB Civil Writ Petition No. 2212/83, in this Court. Aggrieved by the order of the Additional Collector, Sikar, dated 25th Sept. , '78, so far as it related to the 'patta' granted on 16th Nov. , '69, respondents Nos. 4 & 5 had filed a revision petition before the Revenue Appellate Authority, Jaipur. In that revision petition, the present petitioner had raised a preliminary objection that the Additional Collector had passed order under the delegated powers from the State Government, and therefore, no revision petition before the Revenue Appellate Authority was maintainable. The Revenue Appellate Authority, Jaipur, on 13th Sept. , '82, rejected the revision petition of respondents Nos. 4 & 5 holding that the revision petition was not maintainable, because, the Additional Collector had passed the order in pursuance of the delegated powers. Respondents Nos. 4 & 5, in the above writ petition, challenged the orders of Gram Panchayat Reengus; Additional Collector, Sikar; and Revenue Appellate Authority, Jaipur, on various grounds. That writ petition was decided by a learned Single Judge of this Court, on 5th Dec, '83. The learned Single Judge did not go into the question as to whether the revision petition filed by respondents Nos. 4 & 5, before the Revenue Appellate Authority was maintainable or not. He examined the merits of the case and held that the Gram Panchayat had granted Patta for 630 sq. yds & 2 sq. feet, by order dated 16th Nov. , '69, after making full inquiry, and after coming to the conclusion on the basis of the statements recorded that the present petitioner was in possession of that land. The learned Single Judge also said in his order that there was no justification in raising the objection for the first time in 1977. So far as the grant of 'patta' regarding 42 sq. yds. of land was concerned, he held that the Additional Collector himself had set aside the order of the Gram Panchayat dated 3rd Nov. , '74. The writ petition filed by respondents Nos. 4 & 5 was accordingly dismissed.
(3.) IT may further be stated that respondent No. 4 had also instituted a civil suit for a permanent and mandatory injunction, in the court of Munsif, Sawaimadhopur. A copy of the plaint of that suit has been filed by the petitioner, and the same is marked Annexure-8. In that suit, respondent No, 4 had complained that 3-4 years before the filing of the suit, the present petitioner had constructed a latrine near the land, purchased by respondent No. 4, on the land of public-chowk and public-way and that had been dismantled by the Municipal Board in July, '75. Respondent No. 4 apprehended that the present petitioner might make construction over this land of public-chowk and public-way, and he, therefore, prayed for a permanent and mandatory injunction, and for the demolition of the 'chabutra', which had been constructed by the present petitioner on the land of the public- chowk & public-way. That civil suit instituted by respondent No. 4, bearing No. 341/77 was dismissed in default on 8th Mar. , '89, and a certified copy of that order has been produced on behalf of the petitioner. Certain facts are quite clear in the case, and they are also not in dispute and are otherwise well established. Annexure-1 has been filed as a site-plan, showing the location of the petitioner's house, the disputed latrine and the disputed plot of land measuring 21' east-west x 18' north-south. The disputed piece of land is located opposite the house of the petitioner after a vacant land showing the public-way. Adjoining this disputed land, on its immediate west, there was a 'nohara' of Brij Mohan Pareek. It appears from Annexure-7 that Brij Mohan Pareek had sold this 'nohara', with its eastern boundary wall 5' high, on 5th Jan. , '77, to respondents Nos. 4 & 5, through a registered sale deed. While describing the boundaries of the 'nohara', sold by Brij Mohan Pareek to respondents Nos. 4 & 5, it was recited in Annexure-7 that on the eastern side, towards the entrance-gate, there was a public-chowk; on the western side, there was a wall of Brij Mohan Pareek and vacant land. On its northern side, there was vacant land and houses of Brij Mohan Pareek. On 30th Aug. , '74, the petitioner had made an application to Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Reengus, stating that this plot of land was in his possession, and that he wanted that the Panchayat might execute a 'patta' in his favour, at a concessional rate. The site was inspected by Geedaram and Govindram, Panchas, and they measured the plot of land and recommended grant of a 'patta' in favour of the petitioner. The Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat thereupon issued a notice dated 6th Sept. '74, regarding the application made by the petitioner, and inviting objections from persons who had any objection to the grant of Patta No. objections were received. The Panchas recorded statements of two witnesses and of the petitioner, and on that basis, it was held that the petitioner was in possession of the plot of land in question, for the last 15-20 years. The Gram Panchayat purports to have acted under Rule 266 (1) (b) of the Panchayat Rules and ordered issue of a 'patta' by charging price at Rs. 21- per sq. yd. , amounting in all to Rs. 84/ -. A sale-deed in this regard was executed by the Sarpanch-Reengus, on 26th Nov. , '74. ;