INDERJEET SINGH, J. - (1.) This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 26.06.2013 passed by the Additional Collector (III), Jaipur (to be referred as Additional Collector) in Revision No.192/2012 whereby the revision petition submitted by the respondent No.2 i.e. Panchayat Samiti, Amer was allowed and patta dated 20.08.2009 issued in favour of the petitioner was cancelled.
(2.) Counsel for the petitioner submitted that prior to passing of the order dated 26.06.2013 by the Additional Collector opportunity of hearing was not provided to the petitioner. Counsel further submits that one advocate Shri Ram Kumar has given an undertaking before the learned court below for appearing on his behalf but on the date of hearing he neither appeared nor filed any reply. Counsel further submits that the limitation application submitted by the petitioner before the learned court below was not decided. Counsel further submits that the order passed by the learned court below deserves to be set aside.
(3.) Counsel for the respondent submitted that vide order dated 26.06.2013, the Court of Additional Collector decided about hundreds of cases and the learned court below rightly cancelled the pattas issued on 20.08.2009 as the same was granted against the rules and most of the pattas were issued by the Sarpanch in the name of his family members. Counsel further submits that against the same order dated 26.06.2013, the family member of the petitioner has also filed S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.14117/2016 in the matter of Lalaram v. Block Development Officer and Ors . and the said writ petition was dismissed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 24.10.2016 wherein it has been held as under:- "Petitioner has filed this writ petition for quashment of order dated 26.06.2013 (Annexure-3) passed by the court of Additional Collector (III), Jaipur in Revision No.208/2012 filed under Section 97 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994. It is contended that the petitioner was in possession of the land in question from the date when he purchased the same i.e. for last six to seven years, but the respondent no.2, without any cogent reason, has arbitrarily cancelled 'patta' of the said land dated 20.08.2009, vide order dated 26.06.2013. It is further contended that the petitioner had deposited the costs of the land with the Gram Panchayat and he was issued receipt and there was no fault of any kind on the part of the petitioner. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material on record, this court does find any error or illegality in the impugned order. Learned Additional Collector (III), Jaipur, in the impugned order, has observed that the 'patta' in question, alleged to have been issued from the book, has been issued from the authorized book by the panchayat samiti concerned, and the same appears to have been issued from unauthorized book, as all administrative works viz. to make entry in the cash book, issue of notice, counter signature on the patta was required to be done by the Secretary of the Gram Panchayat, but such legal procedure appears to have been followed. The learned Additional Collector rightly accepted the revision and cancelled the 'patta' dated 20.08.2009 as the same was issued from the authorized book. In view of the above, I do find any merit in this writ petition. It is accordingly dismissed. Stay application is also dismissed.";