Amitava Roy, C.J. - (1.) HEARD Mr. R.K. Agarwal, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Sandeep Pathak, Advocate for the appellant. By the instant appeal, the impugned judgment and order dt. 23.11.2012 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14420/2012 filed by the appellant herein, has been challenged. Having regard to the issues raised, we consider it inessential to issue formal notice.
(2.) THE facts, in brief, to be recorded for the purpose of decision of this appeal, are that the appellant claims himself to be an agnate of Late Raja Sardar Singh who had died issueless on 28.1.1987. The appellant has also claimed to be his only legal heir. While the matter rested at that, as the record discloses, an application was filed by one Dwarka Prasad Pareek before the Tehsildar, Jaipur contending therein that the property of the above -named deceased located in Jaipur, Delhi and Jhunjhunu district, had been rendered as escheat as he died issueless and that the same is being encroached upon appropriated illegally. The Tehsildar, Jaipur on 27.2.1987 issued a public notice calling for claims, if any, in respect of the property mentioned therein by 4.8.1987 proclaiming that in absence of any claim so made, the property would vest in the State Government in terms of the Rajasthan Escheats Regulation Act, 1956 (for short hereinafter referred to as "the Act") and possession thereof would be taken over. Thereafter, the Collector, Jhunjhunu by his letter dt. 22.7.1987 addressed to the Tehsildar, Khetri, instructed him to initiate appropriate action with regard to the same property under the Act. The latter authority was also required to make necessary enquiries with regard to the property along with these if any, located abroad and to inform the Collector's office about the details of the property involved and also the steps taken in connection therewith. Pursuant to these advisories, the Tehsildar, Khetri instructed the Patwari to make verification and submit a report. It transpires from the report of the Patwari dt. 3.8.1987 that he acted in terms of the instructions issued and had seized the moveable and immoveable properties as referred to therein and gave the same in custody of the persons, also named in the report. It appears that at or about the same time, an application for obtaining probate had been made in the High Court of Delhi and that the same was as Testamentary Case No. 26/1987. This proceeding was initiated by the Trust who claimed that the deceased had bequeathed his property to it for which the probate was being sought for. The testamentary case was however, dismissed on 3.7.2012. It was at that stage that the appellant approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India claiming himself to be a legal heir and successor of late Raja Sardar Singh of Khetri, and consequently, claiming his right over the property left behind by the deceased, as a successor.
(3.) THE learned Single Judge by the impugned judgment and order declined to interfere, amongst others, on the ground that the proposed adjudication involved contentious questions of fact, and instead observed that the appropriate remedy for the appellant would be to approach the Tehsildar, and thereafter, if needed, to institute a civil suit.;