K.S.RATHORE,J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties. Petitioners submit that they are bona fide purchaser and purchased the land from original khatedar. The controversy arise when the Tehsildar issued a notice u/s. 183 of Tenancy Act. The land, which are possessed by the petitioners originally belongs to SC community and the entry in the revenue record is made contrary to the provisions.
(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners also referred Section 183-B of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955, which is reproduced hereunder: "Summary ejectment of trespassers of the land held by a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe. -(1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any provision of this Act, a trespasser who has taken or retained possession, without lawful authority of the land held by a tenant belonging to Scheduled caste or Scheduled Tribe shall be liable to ejectment on an application of the person or persons entitled to evict him (or on the application in the prescribed manner of a public servant, authorised by the State Government in this behalf) and shall be further liable to pay as penalty for each agricultural year during the whole or any part whereof he has been in such possession, a sum which may extend to (fifty times) the annual rent. (2) The inquiry on an application under sub-section (1) shall be made in a summary manner (and shall be concluded as far as practicable within the prescribed period and after) affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the person alleged to be a trespasser."
(3.) After referring Section 183 he submits that the Tehsildar have to conduct a summary trial and after affording opportunity of being heard to the petitioner can only pass the order.;