- (1.) THE petitioner has prayed in the writ application for quashment of the order dated 26.7.2008 passed by the District Collector, Bikaner and consequential order dated 20.8.2011 issued in favour of U.I.T., Bikaner for the purpose of establishing Stone Market and road. It is submitted by the petitioner that the said land is gochar land. Thus, without reserving alternative gochar land, the land could not have been ordered to be allotted for establishing stone market. Consequential prayer has been made not to convert the land usage to commercial usage in the name of U.I.T., Bikaner and the respondents may be directed to remove the encroachments which have been made over the gochar land.
(2.) AN order dated 16.7.2008 has been filed as Annexure-16 along with additional affidavit. Bare perusal of the order indicates that for the development of Bikaner, the area which was earlier used for stone market was given for railway washing line and in lieu thereof, in order to establish new stone market, out of 1389.57 hectares of total gochar area, small fraction of land measuring 12.50 hectares was ordered to be allotted to U.I.T., Bikaner. Counsel for the petitioner has fairly submitted that the petitioner has earlier filed writ application being D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8191/2007 which was withdrawn by the petitioner on 8.7.2009. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner at length, we find that no case for interference in the writ application is made out. The main grievance of the petitioner is that additional gochar land ought to have been allotted in lieu of the land which has been allotted to the U.I.T., Bikaner for establishment of new stone market. Such a prayer has to be attended to at the first instance by the competent authority for invoking same the petitioner should file appropriate application. On such application being filed, the same is required to be dealt with in accordance with law duly considering the question whether there is necessity to reserve additional gochar land duly considering the various aspects specified for reserving gochar land. The petitioner has not questioned the order on merits. Only submission is that alternative land ought to have been reserved. In case, the petitioner files an appropriate application, let the competent authority consider the prayer for allotment of additional gochar land and to decide the same by a reasoned order as assured by learned counsel Mr.Anand Purohit, Additional Advocate General, and Mr.Pradhuman Singh appearing on behalf of State.
(3.) WE do not find any ground to interfere in the writ application at this stage. Consequently, the writ application is dismissed. Stay petition is also dismissed.;