SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,J. - (1.) This case has a chequered history, however to examine the contentions, it would be appropriate to first mention the facts relating to the revenue record of the land in question as available on record. Admittedly, the land situate in Village Manpur Devri alias Meenawala Tehsil, Jaipur, bearing khasra No.24 admeasuring 1 bigha 3 biswas, khasra No.25 admeasuring 1 bigha 8 biswas, khasra No.26 admeasuring 9 biswas, khasra No.27 admeasruing 12 bigha 2 biswas, khasra No.29 admeasuring 5 bigha 6 biswas, khasra No.32 1 bigha 8 biswas, khasra No.33, admeasruing 3 biswas, khasra No.36, 9 biswas, khasra no.32/140 1 biswa i.e. in all 22 bighas 9 biswas was in the khatedari of one Nand Rani widow of Govind Singh. However, the names came to be entered of Moti, Govinda and Chothu sons of Bhorya as khatedari tenants vide mutation No.10 and the name of widow was deleted. When the said three persons transferred the piece of land, litigation ensued.
(2.) The Tehsildar while coming to know of such act, initiated reference proceedings under Section 82 of the Land Revenue Act on 22.02.1997 to the Collector against mutation No.10 whereby the name of widow Nand Rani was deleted and the land was entered in the name of Moti son of Bhorya, Govinda son of Bhorya and Chothu son of Bhorya and whereafter the said land was further entered in the name of other persons vide mutation nos.34, 44, 45, 46 and 64. The reference proceedings were initiated and on enquiry, it was found that Moti son of Bhorya who was by caste Meena and belonged to Scheduled Tribe, changed his religion to Christianity for the purpose of selling the land, although after his death, all rituals and ceremonies performed as per Hindu Rites.
(3.) The reference was initiated on the basis of the provision contained under Section 46 read with Section 19 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 which allowed letting or subletting by a widow, and therefore, the tenants would not acquire khatedari rights on her land in terms of Section 19 of the Act of 1955. Name of Nand Rani was thus wrongly struck off in mutation No.10.;