1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH JAIPUR ORDER S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5477/2001 Krishan Lal Khatri Versus State of Rajasthan DATE OF ORDER --- May 05,2010 PRESENT HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE PREM SHANKER ASOPA Dr.P.C.Jain, for the petitioner Ms.Priyanka Pareek, Dy. Govt. Counsel BY THE COURT (1) This writ petition has been filed with the following prayer: “It is, therefore, most humbly and respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court graciously accept this writ petition set aside/quash the orders passed by the Collector Dausa and deprecate the action taken by him thereby inserting the news in news papers (Annexure-D). The whole of the record be called from the office of Collector, Dausa as well as the Assistant Registrar Cooperative Society, Tehsildar Dausa. The same may kindly be examined and the action taken by the Collector, Dausa be quashed, the news inserved in (Annexure-D) be also quashed and set aside. “ (2) Briefly stated, the facts of the case, as per the writ petition, are that on account of partition of India in the year 1947, many of the refugee families migrated from Pakistan to India and took their shelter in various parts of the country. The petitioner's father was one of the refugee allottees of the land in Dausa Distt. The petitioner is concerned only with his own cause that about 26 families were rehabilitated and were allotted the piece of land which was barren in nature and was therefore, to be made cultivable. Certain amount of loans were also required but the same could not be given until and unless the collective efforts were made and as such, a Cooperative Society was also brought into being and the loan was raised which stood paid to the government 2 agency as and when it was possible. The Cooperative Society therefore, became defunct as soon as the loan was paid off. (3) In the year 1980 and thereafter, the settlement operations came into being wherein the lands were recorded in the name of the Cooperative Society and mistake was committed at the office of the Assistant Settlement Officer in the year 1981 and persons in possession of the land were not entered as Khatedar tenants. Thereafter, four appeals being Appeal No.90/1981, 91/1981, 92/1981 and 93/1981 were filed by some other refugee allottees which came to be decided vide judgment dated 30.11.1981. Thereafter, the State Government (Settlement Commissioner, Rajasthan) in its discretion, made a reference against the aforesaid judgment dated 30.11.1981 to the Board of Revenue where those references were registered as Reference No. 741/1997/LR/Dausa, 742/1997/LR/Dausa, 743/1997/LR/Dausa and 744/1997/LR/Dausa and the same were dismissed vide judgment dated 20.4.1998. The Board of Revenue held that the land was actually allotted to the individual refugee and not to the Cooperative Society. Subsequently, news item was got published on 11.10.2001 in Samachar Jagat and Rajasthan Patrika Daily News Papers in which there is reference of the direction of the Collector to declare the land as Sawai Chak and on the basis of the aforesaid news item, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition. (4) The respondent State has filed reply to the writ petition and taken preliminary objection that the present writ petition, which has been filed on the basis of news item published in the aforesaid news papers dated 11.10.2001, is not maintainable and the same is liable to be dismissed. In para 10 of the writ petition it has been stated that in the aforesaid news item, it was stated that the land recorded in the name of the Cooperative Society of Village Dalelpura be converted to Sawai Chak and the same be taken in possession of Tehsildar, Dausa and at the same time, it was stated that on the said lands the illegal 3 construction which has been raised be proceeded against within seven days and the matter be reported to the Collector. On coming to the Collectorate office it was given out that no copy of the record could be given nor any order could be furnished to any of the aggrieved parties. (5) Submission of counsel for the petitioner is that the land was wrongly recorded in the name of the Cooperative Society as has been held by the Settlement Officer vide its judgment dated 30.11.1981 and the four References made against the same to the Board of Revenue were dismissed (6) Submission of counsel for the State is that there is no impugned order and further the petitioner has not submitted any application either before filing of the writ petition for obtaining copy of the order or filed the same after filing the writ petition. Presently also, the remedy is available to the petitioner to obtain a copy of the adverse order under the Right to Information Act, 2005. (7) Counsel for the petitioner stated at the Bar that the actual allotment of land is in the name of Jivan Mal son of Amir Chand, who is father of the petitioner. However, measurement of the land has not been mentioned in the writ petition. (8) This Court on 23.11.2001 passed order to maintain status quo as regards possession of the land in question and the same is still in force. The land appears to have been allotted vide Annexure-A in the year 1949 to Jivan Mal, father of the petitioner. (9) I have gone through record of the writ petition and further considered rival submission of counsel for the parties. (10) It is settled position of law that unless an adverse order is on record or some application for seeking copy of such adverse order is on record, which was either denied or kept pending, no writ petition is maintainable even for calling for the record and quashing the adverse order simply on the basis of news item relating to the adverse order passed against the aggrieved person. 4 (11) Considering the fact that father of the petitioner (since deceased) and thereafter, the petitioner is in possession of the land since the year 1949 and the Board of Revenue in reference filed by other refugee allottees has held the allotment valid, therefore, I think it proper that an opportunity be allowed to the petitioner to obtain copy of the adverse order from the Collector, Dausa/Public Information Officer under the Right to Information Act, 2005. (12) Accordingly, in case the petitioner now submits any application to the Collector, Dausa or under the Right to Information Act, 2005 within a period of one month to the respondent for obtaining copy of the adverse order, then the copy be given to the petitioner within next one month and thereafter, the petitioner will be at liberty to seek appropriate remedy before the appropriate forum for relief/interim relief, within another period of one month. (13) For a period of three months, status quo, as it exists today, in regard to the land in question, shall be maintained. (14) The writ petition is disposed of, with the above observations. (Prem Shanker Asopa) J. गोpa ल