1 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.7224/2008. (Babu Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Others) DATE OF ORDER : 06.01.2009 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS ______________________________________ Mr. Moti Singh for the petitioner. Mr. Sajjan Singh for the respondent(s). Mr. Alkesh Aggarwal, Dy. Govt. Counsel. In this writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the validity of order dated 01.02.2007 passed in the revision petition filed under Section 97 of the Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 by the petitioner whereby the revision petition was rejected and the resolution of the Gram Panchayat dated 12.04.1999 and sale- deed 10.11.1999 was declared illegal. The main contention of the petitioner is that patta in question which is issued by the Gram Panchayat, Mada was issued in clear violation of the provisions of the rules while preparing false documents. Learned counsel for the petitioner while inviting attention of this Court towards Annex.-6 submits that patta Annex.-1 dated 12.04.1999 was issued upon the proceedings of Annex.-6. The application for issuing the patta was filed by respondent Chhoga Ram on 20.01.1990 and the said application was proceeded as per Annex.-6 by the Gram Panchayat on 15.02.1999, after 9 years; and, thereafter, finally patta was issued on 12.02.1999 without following the procedure 2 laid down in the rules. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that patta Annex.-1 was issued without following any procedure and so also it appears from the order-sheet Annex.-7 that in the first order-sheet there is no mention of date nor any signature of Sarpanch is there. In these facts and circumstances, therefore, this document is suspicious document which is said to be drawn on 20.01.1990. Further, it is argued that the first order-sheet Annex.-6 was drawn without any date and without any signature and, straight away, after 9 years, upon the application Annex.-5, file was proceeded with and patta was issued, therefore, the revision petition was to be allowed but the learned District Collector shut the eyes to the facts and circumstances of the case and ignored the material documents and affirmed the patta issued by the Gram Panchayat, Mada, holding that it is in accordance with law. It is vehemently contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that such finding given by the District Collector is totally erroneous; moreover, the finding is contrary to the documentary evidence on record of the case, therefore, the order impugned passed by the District Collector, Pali may be set aside and the revision petition filed by the petitioner under Section 97 may be ordered to be allowed. Learned counsel for the respondents, on the contrary, argued that the order passed by the District Collector under 3 Section 97 of the Act of 1994 does not require any interference. Learned counsel for the respondent while admitting the fact that proceedings for issuing patta was initiated vide Annex.-6 in which in the first order-sheet there is no signature of the Sarpanch and, so also, there is no mention of the date and, further, it is accepted that after 9 years the application of the applicant for granting patta was proceeded with and, after inviting objections on the basis of old possession, patta has been issued in accordance with the Rules of 1996, in which, there is nothing wrong and the learned District Collector has rightly passed order while dismissing the revision petition of the petitioner which does not require any interference. Learned counsel for the respondents vehemently argued that even if there is irregularity in the proceedings of the Gram Panchayat, the said patta was issued by the Gram Panchayat on the basis of old possession of the applicant and no prejudice whatsoever was caused to the petitioner, therefore, this writ petition is bereft of merit and deserves to be dismissed. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the entire record of the case. In my opinion, without entering into other grounds taken in the case, this writ petition can be decided on the basis of the documents Annex.-5 and Annex.-6 only because both these documents are admitted by respondents and only argument is 4 that there is no illegality in granting patta by the Gram Panchayat. In my opinion, the said contention is totally baseless and has no foundation to stand in the eye of law inasmuch as while issuing patta or for the disposal of land by sale, there is complete procedure laid down in the Rules of 1996; but, in this case, admittedly, the application for granting patta was filed by respondent No.4 on 20.01.1990. On that date, the Rules of 1996 were not in existence. The Panchayat Act stood amended by the Act of 1994 and, thereafter, the Rules of 1996 were framed; meaning thereby, no proper application was filed by respondent Chhoga Ram for issuance of patta in accordance with the procedure laid down under the Rules of 1996; but, this aspect of the matter was completely ignored by the District Collector, Pali while proceeding to affirm the patta issued by the Gram Panchayat after 9 years of presentation of the application by the respondent. It is also obvious from perusal of Annex.-6 that it bears no signature of the Sarpanch in the order-sheet and the application filed by the respondent on 20.01.1990 was entertained first in the year 1990 and the patta was, however, issued on 12.04.1999. This material was available before the District Collector, Pali. It is, therefore, very strange that the District Collector, Pali gave contrary finding and affirmed the said patta which was issued in complete contravention of the rules. The 5 District Collector, Pali has not applied mind and completely ignored the material on record of the case which was summoned from the Gran Panchayat, Mada and gave finding contrary to the record while upholding the patta issued in favour of respondent No.4. The whole proceedings is completely in violation of the Rules of 1996 and, so also, based on suspicious documents; but, the District Collector gave indulgence in the case of respondent No.4 for the reasons best known to him and upheld the patta dated 10.11.1999 which is totally illegal and contrary to the record of the case. Therefore, the order passed by the District Collector, Pali does not stand the test of legitimacy and legality. The order impugned has been passed by the District Collector, Pali while exercising power under Section 97 of the Act of 1994 which is power of superintendence. But, upon perusal of Annex.-4 and Annex.-6, it is abundantly clear that patta Annex.-1 was issued in gross violation of the rules and the District Collector has shut his eyes to the illegality committed while issuing the patta and upheld the patta issued in favour of respondent No.4 Chhoga Ram which is not permissible under the law because the power of superintendence is to be exercised judiciously in the light of the material on record. In this view of the matter, therefore, this writ petition is allowed. The resolution No.3(II) of the Gram Panchayat Mada dated 12.04.1999, patta Annex.-1 and, so also, order dated 6 01.02.2007 passed by the District Collector, Pali are hereby quashed and set aside. However, the Gram Panchayat, Mada is at liberty to take final decision for disposal of the land in question in accordance with law. There shall however be no order as to costs. (Gopal Krishan Vyas) J. Ojha, a.