- (1.) THIS is an application by Ganesh under Art. 226 of the Constitution paying for a writ of Certiorari, or any other appropriate writ, direction or order,
(2.) THE facts out of which the present application has arisen are these. Nathmal opposite party, applied to the Tehsildar, Bikaner, for grant of a plot of land in village Kismidesar on Raiyatana. THE matter was enquired into by the Naib-Tehsildar and eventually the Tehsildar recommended that the particular piece of land asked for should not be granted, but another piece of land, not very far from it, might be granted to Nathmal, THE file was then submitted to the Assistant Collector, Bikaner (North) for sanction and he sanctioned the grant of this other piece of land of Raiyatana to Nathmal on the 18th of April, 1953, Later when Nathmal began constructions on the land so granted, the applicant Ganesh, whose house is adjacent to the land granted to Nathmal, made an appeal before the Commissioner, Bikaner Division. This appeal was allowed by the Commis-sioner and the order of the Assistant Collector was set aside. THEreupon, Nathmal preferred an appeal to the Board of Revenue. THE Board treated it as a revision and set aside the order of the Commissioner and restored the order of the Assistant Collector. THEreafter, the applicant has come to this Court and his contention is that the Board had no jurisdiction to interfere with the order of the Commissioner, which was final and, therefore, the order of the Board should be quashed by us. Reliance in this connection is placed on the Statement of Powers issued by the Government of the former State of Bikaner in 1964, Appendix D, page 34 item 16. This item deals with giving of land to poor settlers on Raiyatana. THE order giving the land is to be passed by the Nazim who is shown in column 6 to have full powers for the purpose. THEn in column 5, it is mentioned that the Revenue Commissioner has appellate powers from orders so passed. THEre is no further provision for any appeal or revision against item 16 and the applicant, therefore, urges that the order of the Commissioner was final and the Board of Revenue had no power to interfere in appeal. The application has been opposed by Nathmal. But we do not think it necessary to set out the grounds of opposition in detail, as we have come to the conclusion that the applicant before us has no locus standi in proceedings of this nature under item 16. It is enough to say that these proceedings for grant of land to poor settlers on Raiyatana are executive proceedings. The Government as owner of land has provided for grant of land poor settlers arid had given power to certain officers to make the grant. A further power has been given to a superior officer to hear an appeal under this item, but there is no provision anywhere (and learned counsel for the applicant has mot been able to point out any) which gives a right to any, one to object to the grant of land by the Government under item 16. No procedure has been provided anywhere by which applications for grant of land, which are made under item 16, are to be published and objections are to be invited. It seems to us that item 16, as it stands, merely contemplates an application by a poor settler for grant of land on Raiyatana and it is for the Nazim to decide to grant that land. There is no scope, so far as we can see for any objection by anyone and there is no provision that there should be any other party to be consulted before the grant of the land. It is true that an appeal is provided from the order of the Nazim, But it appears to us that that is only in case the Nazim refuses the poor settler's request. In that case, he has been given a right to go to the Commissioner for grant of land. But if the Nazim or the Assistant Collector, (as he is now said to have replaced the Nazim,) decides to grant land to poor settlers' on Rajyatana, the matter becomes final and there is no provision for any appeal by third parties. The reason for this is clear, for third parties have no interest in the grant of their own land by the Government to anyone. In these circumstances, we are of opinion,that once the Assistant Collector decided to grant certain land to Nathmal on the 18th of April, 1953, and passed an order to that effect, the whole matter was over and it was not open to any third person to take it in appeal to the Commissioner. All the proceedings, therefore, from the Commissioner upwards were without jurisdiction. Further, as the effect of the order of the Board of Revenue is to restore the order of the Assistant Collector which alone is the order which was with jurisdiction in the case,we are of opinion that we should notinter-fere in exercise of our extra-ordinary powers. If the applicant feels aggrieved on the ground that the door of his bara has been blocked,he has a remedy by filing a suit in the Civil Court On the other hand, if he feels that the road had been blocked, he as a member of the public may proceed under sec. 133 of the Criminal Procedure Code But we are of opinion that as soon as the Assistant Collector granted the land to a poor settler, the matter is over and no third person has a right to go in appeal. In this view of the matter, we are of opinion that there is no force in the present application and it must be dismissed. But considering the view that we have taken, we order parties to bear their own costs. .;