- (1.) BY this common judgment / order, S.B. Civil Review Petition No.222/2008 filed on 16.10.2008 by the Jaipur Development Authority (respondent No.2 in SBCWP No.8768/2007 decided on 30.10.2007), S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No.415/2008 filed by Baji Ram (petitioner No.1 in SBCWP No.8768/2007 decided on 30.10.2007) and S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No.506/2008 filed by Ram Nath (petitioner No.2 in SBCWP No.8768/2007 decided on 30.10.2007), which arise out of the same judgment dated 30.10.2007 passed in SBCWP No.8768/2007 Baji Ram and another V. State of Rajasthan, therefore, all have been clubbed together and are being decided / disposed of by this common judgment / order.
(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts of the case are that Bajiram and Ramnath jointly filed SBCWP No.8768/2007 impleading the State of Rajasthan, Jaipur Development Authority, Distt. Collector, Jaipur, Sub Divisional Officer, Sanganer and Tehsildar, Sanganer as respondents for seeking an appropriate order or direction to the respondents to enter the land falling in Khasra Nos. 602 and 611 (previously Khasra No.435), situated in Village Paldi Meena, Tehsil Sanganer, Distt. Jaipur in the name of the writ petitioners as directed vide order dated 25.4.1976 passed by the Land Settlement Department. In the said writ petition, on 24.10.2007, the notices were ordered to be issued to the respondents and the then Addl. Govt. Advocate accepted the notices on behalf of all the respondents. The next date fixed was 30.10.2007 and on 30.10.2007 the said writ petition was allowed and the respondents were directed to make entry in the revenue record as per the order dated 25.4.1976 and the compliance of the order was to be made within three months. Further relevant undisputed facts and dates are as follows: 16.10.2008 Present S.B. Civil Review Petition No. 222/2008 was filed by the Jaipur Development Authority (respondent No.2 in SBCWP No.8768/2007). DBSAW No.1793/2008 in SBCWP No.8768/2007 filed by the State of Rajasthan, Distt. Collector, Jaipur, Sub Divisional Officer, Sanganer and the Tehsildar, Sanganer wherein the petitioners Bajiram and Ramnath were respondents No.1 and 2 whereas the JDA was proforma-respondent No.3. 05/11/08 DBSAW No.1793/2008 was dismissed by the Division Bench of this Court and the order dated 30.10.2007 passed by the Single Bench was upheld. D.B. Civil Review Petition No.230/2008 was filed by the State of Rajasthan, Distt. Collector, Sub Divisional Officer and Tehsildar under Order 41 Rule 1 CPC read with Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking review of the order dated 5.11.2008 wherein also, Bajiram and Ramnath were respondents No.1 and 2 and the JDA was impleaded as proforma-respondent No.3. 20.1.2009 D.B. Civil Review Petition No.230/2008 was dismissed. 04/09/09 The State of Rajasthan and others filed two SLPs (Civil) CC 11581-11582/2009 against the judgment and order dated 20.1.2009 in DB Civil Review Petition No.230/2008 in DBCSA No.1793/2008 and dated 5.11.2008 in DBCSA No.1793/2008 in SBCWP No.8768/2007, which were dismissed on 4.9.2009 on the ground of delay as well as on merits. It is pertinent to mention here that in the present review petition filed at the instance of the Jaipur Development Authority, Bajiram, Ram Nath, State of Rajasthan, Distt. Collector, Jaipur, Sub Divisional Officer, Sanganer and Tehsildar, Tehsil Sanganer have been made respondents whereas in DBSAW No.1793/2008 filed by the same counsel on behalf of the State of Rajasthan, Distt. Collector, Jaipur, Sub Divisional Officer, Sanganer, Distt. Jaipur and Tehsildar, Tehsil Sanganer, Distt. Jaipur, the writ petitioners Bajiram and Ramnath were impleaded as respondents No.1 and 2 and the Jaipur Development Authority was impleaded as proforma-respondent No.3. The aforesaid DBSAW No.1793/2008 was also barred by time and an application under section 5, Limitation Act was filed. While condoning the delay, the Division Bench dismissed the special appeal on merit, vide order dated 5.11.2008. Along with the present review petition, an application under section 5, Limitation Act was filed for condonation of delay of 322 days. The writ-petitioners (respondents herein in the present review petition) put in appearance on 27.11.2008 and two weeks' time was granted to the review petitioner to remove the defects. On 9.1.2009, the fact of non service of the notice upon the JDA and some more facts, including dismissal of the DBSAW on 5.11.2008 were brought to the notice of the Court by the parties.
(3.) IN the review petition, the J.D.A. has placed on record certain developments including the nature of the land, placing the land at the disposal of the J.D.A. and further allotments. It is also pertinent to mention here that the JDA filed Application No.208 dated 5.1.2009 placing on record copy of the civil suit filed by the writ petitioners along with Nathulal, for declaration of Khatedari rights, reply to the civil suit filed by the JDA and dismissal of the same vide order dated 22.1.1999 by SDM Jaipur-II under Order 17 Rule 3 CPC for absence of the counsel as well as non production of the documents despite direction. On 28.7.2011, the respondent No.1 Bajiram (petitioner in the writ petition) filed an Application No.35846 for placing on record the relevant documents i.e. (i) certified copy of the order dated 5.11.2008 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in DBSAW No.1793/2008 State of Rajasthan and others v. Bajiram and others, (ii) certified copy of the order dated 20.1.2009 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in DB Civil Review Petition No.230/2008 State of Rajasthan and others V. Shri Baji Ram and others; (iii) copy of the order dated 4.9.2009 passed by the Supreme Court in two SLPs (Civil) CC No.11581-11582/2009 State of Rajasthan and others v. Baji Ram and others and (iv) certified copy of DB Civil Review Petition No.230/2008 in DBSAW No.1793/2008 in SBCWP No.8768/2007 State of Rajasthan and others V. Baji Ram and another along with the stay petition. Both the applications were allowed on 1.8.2011. On the issue of delay, it was submitted by Mr.G.S.Bafna, learned Sr.Advocate and Advocate General that the JDA came to know of the judgment dated 30.10.2007 on 10.9.2008 when the Tehsildar, Sanganer informed the Dy. Commissioner, JDA Zone-10, Jaipur about the passing of the said judgment and immediately, thereafter, the concerned officer of the JDA contacted the office of the Tehsildar and collected the copy of the writ petition and the copy of the judgment and further time was consumed in the process and the review petition was filed on 16.10.2008, therefore, there was sufficient cause to condone the delay. ;