1. CW.2744/2001- Municipal Board, Sanchore. VS Nagji & Ors., 2. cw.2655/2001 - Municipal Board, Sanchore. VS Virdha Ram & Ors., 3.CW.2689/2001- Municipal Board, Sanchore. VS Sawa & Ors. & 4. cw-57/2002 - Municipal Board, Sanchore. VS Jethmal & Ors. Judgment dt.25.4.08 1/6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR. 1. S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2744/2001 Municipal Board, Sanchore. VS Nagji & Ors. 2. S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2655/2001 Municipal Board, Sanchore. VS Virdha Ram & Ors. 3. S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2689/2001 Municipal Board, Sanchore. VS Sawa & Ors. 4. S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.57/2002 Municipal Board, Sanchore. VS Jethmal & Ors. PRESENT HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI Mr.Yashwant Mehta, for the petitioner. Mr.H.S.Balot, for respondents DATE OF JUDGMENT : 25th April, 2008. JUDGMENT 1. Heard the learned counsels for the parties. 2. This petition is directed against the order of the learned 1. CW.2744/2001- Municipal Board, Sanchore. VS Nagji & Ors., 2. cw.2655/2001 - Municipal Board, Sanchore. VS Virdha Ram & Ors., 3.CW.2689/2001- Municipal Board, Sanchore. VS Sawa & Ors. & 4. cw-57/2002 - Municipal Board, Sanchore. VS Jethmal & Ors. Judgment dt.25.4.08 2/6 Collector, Jalore Annex.4 dated 30.9.1997 and subsequent order of the Additional Divisional Commissioner Annex.5 dated 31.12.1999. By these orders, the application of the Municipal Council, Sanchore filed to the learned Collector under Section 80(2) of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 1959 was rejected. 3. The said application was filed by the Municipal Council on the ground that regularisation or allotment of land made in favour of the private respondents was incorrect because they were not in long possession of the land in question. Therefore, the allotment made by the then Committee/Chairman of the Municipal Council in the year 1983 was not sustainable. The learned Collector by the impugned order dated 30.9.1997 rejected the said application on the ground that once the Municipality had allotted the said land in question and regularized the same, Section 80(2) of the Act did not apply to the facts of the case as under Section 30(2) of the Act, only when such process of allotment was pending before the Municipal Council, the State Government or any other officer authorized in this behalf could stay or keep in abeyance such proceedings. 1. CW.2744/2001- Municipal Board, Sanchore. VS Nagji & Ors., 2. cw.2655/2001 - Municipal Board, Sanchore. VS Virdha Ram & Ors., 3.CW.2689/2001- Municipal Board, Sanchore. VS Sawa & Ors. & 4. cw-57/2002 - Municipal Board, Sanchore. VS Jethmal & Ors. Judgment dt.25.4.08 3/6 4. Having heard the learned counsel, this Court finds that the authorities below have obviously not noticed the provisions of Section 80(2) of the Act fully. The said provisions are reproduced hereunder for ready reference: “80. Provisions relating to transfer of property and contracts: (1)........... (2)(a) the State Government or any Officer authorized by it in this behalf may, for the purpose of satisfying as to the correctness, legality, or propriety of any proposal to lease, sale or transfer of any Government land made by or on behalf of a board or by any member Chairman, Vice-Chairman or Officer of a board or by any member Chairman, Vice-Chairman or Officer of a board call for the relevant record and may while doing so direct that pending the examination of the matter, the proposal to lease, sell or transfer of the Government land shall remain in abeyance and no action in furtherance thereof shall be taken till the decision of the State Government 1. CW.2744/2001- Municipal Board, Sanchore. VS Nagji & Ors., 2. cw.2655/2001 - Municipal Board, Sanchore. VS Virdha Ram & Ors., 3.CW.2689/2001- Municipal Board, Sanchore. VS Sawa & Ors. & 4. cw-57/2002 - Municipal Board, Sanchore. VS Jethmal & Ors. Judgment dt.25.4.08 4/6 or of the aforesaid officer under Sub-Sec.(2)(b). (b) If after examination of the record and after giving to the person interested in such proposal, a reasonable opportunity of being heard, the State Government or the officer authorized as aforesaid, is satisfied that the proposal to lease, sell or transfer the Government land is not in accordance with or in contravention of the provisions of this Act, it may by order published in the Official Gazette, modify, cancel or rescind wholly or in part the proposal made for lease, sale or transfer of the Government land or any action or proceeding taken in pursuance thereof or may give any other direction as may be deemed proper. 5. Section 80(2)(b) of the Act clearly permits such Authority if after examination of the record and after giving to the person interested in such proposal, a reasonable opportunity of being heard, the State Government or the officer authorized as aforesaid, is satisfied that the proposal to lease, sell or transfer the Government 1. CW.2744/2001- Municipal Board, Sanchore. VS Nagji & Ors., 2. cw.2655/2001 - Municipal Board, Sanchore. VS Virdha Ram & Ors., 3.CW.2689/2001- Municipal Board, Sanchore. VS Sawa & Ors. & 4. cw-57/2002 - Municipal Board, Sanchore. VS Jethmal & Ors. Judgment dt.25.4.08 5/6 land is not in accordance with or in contravention of the provisions of this Act, it may by order published in the Official Gazette, modify, cancel or rescind wholly or in part the proposal made for lease, sale or transfer of the Government land or any action or proceeding taken in pursuance thereof or may give any other direction as may be deemed proper. 6. A closer scrutiny of Section 80(2)(a) of the Act also indicates that this power is a sort of revisional power vested in the State Government or the Officer authorized in this behalf who may call for the record and may while doing so direct that pending the examination of the matter, the proposal to lease, sell or transfer of the Government land shall remain in abeyance. Apparently, therefore, clause (a) confers power to pass interim order for staying or keeping in abeyance such proceedings; while clause (b) is the power vested in the State or the such authority authorized in this behalf to even modify, cancel or rescind such proposal. 7. That as per the said provisions, the learned Collector could not have refused to exercise the jurisdiction under Section 80(2) of the 1. CW.2744/2001- Municipal Board, Sanchore. VS Nagji & Ors., 2. cw.2655/2001 - Municipal Board, Sanchore. VS Virdha Ram & Ors., 3.CW.2689/2001- Municipal Board, Sanchore. VS Sawa & Ors. & 4. cw-57/2002 - Municipal Board, Sanchore. VS Jethmal & Ors. Judgment dt.25.4.08 6/6 Act on the ground that the Municipal Council had taken decision in the matter and therefore, Section 80(2) did not apply. This premise of the impugned order is apparently in conflict with complete reading of the aforesaid quoted provisions of Section 80(2) of the Act. 8. Consequently, this writ petition is allowed and the impugned order Annex.4 dated 30.9.1997 and Annex.5 dated 31.12.1999 are quashed and set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Collector, Jalore for decision afresh after holding such enquiry in the matter as is considered expedient by him in accordance with law. No order as to costs. (Dr.VINEET KOTHARI)J. Item No.4 to 7 arti/-