[1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR O R D E R S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 7867/2004 KISHORI NATH & ANR. Vs. BOARD OF REVENUE & ORS. DATE: 20.08.2007. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RATHORE Mr. Govind Gupta for Mr. Rajendra Soni for the petitioners. **** The petitioners have no care to file PF and notices for the unserved respondents since long and it appears that the petitioners are not interest in prosecuting the present writ petition. I have gone through the writ petition on merits also. By way of this writ petition, the petitioners have challenged the impugned orders dated 06.11.2000, 07.02.2001 and 25.06.2001, by which receiver under Section 212 of the Land Revenue Act has been appointed. The respondent Nos. 2 to 4 have filed an application before the SDO, Kotputli under Section 212 of the Land Revenue Act for appointing a receiver claiming that the land in question has been purchased by them. The aforesaid application filed by the [2] respondents has been allowed by the SDO vide order dated 06.11.2000 and the Tehsildar, Kotputli has been appointed as receiver of the land in question. Against the order of SDO dated 06.11.2000, the petitioners have filed an appeal before the Revenue Appellate Authority, Jaipur and the same was also dismissed by the Revenue Appellate Authority vide its order dated 07.02.2001. The said order dated 07.02.2001 passed by the Revenue Appellate Authority was assailed by the petitioner before the Board of Revenue, Ajmer by way of filing revision petition and that too was also dismissed by the Board of Revenue vide order dated 25.06.2001. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have also gone through the impugned orders dated 06.11.2000, 07.02.2001 and 25.06.2001 passed by the SDO, Kotputli, Revenue Appellate Authority and the Board of Revenue, Ajmer respectively. All the Courts below have given concurrent findings and looking to the nature of the dispute between the parties, it was thought proper by the Court below to appoint a receiver and the order of the SDO, Kotputli dated 06.11.2000 has rightly been upheld by the Revenue Appellate Authority and the Board of [3] Revenue, Ajmer and Tehsildar, Kotputli has been appointed as a receiver. The petitioners have not been able to make out any case to show as to how the impugned orders require interference by this Court. Thus, I find no illegality in the impugned orders dated 06.11.2000, 07.02.2001 and 25.06.2001 passed by the SDO, Kotputli, Revenue Appellate Authority and the Board of Revenue, Ajmer respectively. Consequently, the writ petition fails and the same is hereby dismissed not only on merits but also on the ground that the petitioners are not interested in filing the required fresh PF and notices to prosecute the writ petition. The stay order dated 22.08.2005 granted by this Court also stands rejected. The stay application stands rejected accordingly. (K.S. RATHORE),J. /KKC/