Arun Bhansali, J. - (1.) THIS matter comes up on an application filed by the respondents No. 1 to 4 under Article 226(3) of the Constitution of India seeking vacation of ad -interim order dated 30.05.2014 passed by this Court.
(2.) THE writ petition has been filed by the petitioners aggrieved against the judgment dated 08.10.2013 passed by the Board of Revenue ('the Board'), whereby the revision petition filed by the respondents against the judgment dated 19.03.2008 passed by the Additional Divisional Commissioner, Udaipur ('the Commissioner') was allowed. Facts in brief may be noticed thus: the respondents No. 1 to 4 filed suit before the SDO, Chittorgarh under Section 88 and 188 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 ('the Act of 1955') seeking declaration of their tenancy rights and permanent injunction against the State and the defendants. The suit was decreed by the SDO by its judgment and decree dated 03.09.2001. The appeal filed by the State before the Revenue Appellate Authority ('the RAA') against the judgment and decree dated 03.09.2001 was dismissed on 31.10.2013. It is claimed that the second appeal filed by the State is pending before the Board.
(3.) IN the meanwhile, pursuant to the judgment and decree dated 03.09.2001, the land was mutated in the name of respondents No. 1 to 4 vide mutation No. 770 dated 05.11.2001. Against the said mutation, the State filed an appeal and the Collector, Udaipur by his order dated 30.03.2003 allowed the appeal and set aside the mutation.;