CHHAIL SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed by Chhail Singh and others who are successors-in-title in respect of agricultural land measuring 19 bighas and 18 biswas situated in khasra No. 175 in village Mudi, Tehsil Jalore, being aggrieved by the order of the Board of the Revenue upon reference under Section 232 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act by the Collector, Jalore by his order dated 17.8.1998 whereby the Board of Revenue by the impugned order dated 12.3.1999 allowed the said reference and set aside the decree in favour of the predecessor in title Guman Singh passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, Jalore on 30.7.1969 in Revenue Suit No. 4/1969 filed by the said plaintiff Guman Singh under Section 88 and 89 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955.

(2.) The main contention raised by the learned Counsel for the petitioners Mr. Sudheer Sharma is that the said suit was decreed in favour of Guman Singh, since the defendant Padmiya present petitioner in this writ petition, a person belonging to Scheduled Caste, did not remain present before the said trial Court despite service of summons and therefore, in exparte proceedings after taking oral evidence of the plaintiff and two other witnesses, the said trial Court decreed the suit in favour of plaintiff Guman Singh on the ground that said plaintiff Guman Singh was in possession of said agricultural land from period even prior to settlement in the year 1955.

(3.) After about 25 years, the said defendant Padmiya, the present petitioner through his legal representatives i.e. his wife and son and daughter filed reference application before the Collector, Jalore under Section 232 of the Act who by his order dated 17.8.1998 found that in the Revenue Record, the said agricultural land was recorded in the name of the defendant Padmiya S/O Jeeva by caste Bhambhi, a member of Scheduled Caste right from Samwat year 2004 till 31.8.1969 when in pursuance of registered sale-deed executed by plaintiff Guman Singh in favour of one Mehrab Khan S/O Niyaz Khan, mutation was changed and was recorded in favour of said Mehrab Khan vide mutation entry No. 157 dated 16.8.1969. The learned Collector found that the said change of mutation was in violation of provisions of Section 42(b) of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 as any sale, gift or bequest of a land belonging to a member of Scheduled Caste to a person of other caste is void and therefore, no such right could be conferred upon the seller Mr. Guman Singh even by a decree and the said decree passed by the learned SDO on 30.7.1969 was, therefore, void and deserved to be set aside and therefore, the said Collector made a reference to the Board of Revenue under Section 232 of the Act.