SHAMBHU SINGH & ORS Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS
LAWS(RAJ)-2013-12-192
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Decided on December 09,2013

Shambhu Singh And Ors Appellant
VERSUS
State Of Rajasthan And Ors Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) This writ petition seeks to challenge the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner-II, Devasthan Jaipur dated 5/7/2013, who has on remand of the matter to him under order dated 16/4/2012 passed by the Commissioner Devasthan, reopened the issues.
(2.) Contention of the learned counsel for petitioners is that limited remand was made by the Commissioner Devasthan before whom earlier order of the Assistant Commissioner-II Jaipur dated 26/12/2011 was challenged directing that Assistant Commissioner shall consider Form-8 submitted by the petitioners and others for filling up of the vacancies of trustees keeping in view the provisions of Sections 23 and 51 of the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 on the basis of majority and over all interest of the Trust after giving opportunities to the parties and pass fresh order. Appeal filed by the petitioners was only partly accepted and therefore this was limited remand. Assistant Commissioner on remand has re-visited certain such findings, which he recorded in favour of the appellant in his earlier order and has illegally reopened the issues. Order passed by the Assistant Commissioner is therefore incompetent in law inasmuch as, he travelled beyond the scope of review, thus exceeded his jurisdiction. Therefore petitioners can directly maintain this writ petition before this court assailing all the three orders, two orders passed by the Assistant Collector and also order of remand passed by the Commisisoner Devasthan.
(3.) Learned senior counsel for the respondents opposed the writ petition contending that order passed by the Assistant Collector would fall within the purview of Sections 18 and 19 of the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 and therefore would be appellable to the Commissioner under Section 20. Therefore, writ petition may not be maintainable. Argument that the order dated 19/7/2011 earlier passed by the Assistant Commissioner had attained finality and could not be reopened on certain issues, can even be examined by the Commissioner. That argument is contended by the respondents.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.