CW 10339/08 //1// In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Jaipur Bench ** Civil Writ Petition No.10339/2008 Dr. Jitendra Singh & Others Versus JDA Appellate Tribunal & Ors. Date of Order ::: 29/07/09 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi Mr. S.S.Hora, for petitioners. Mr. RD Rastogi, for petitioners-2, 3 & 5 Mr. SN Kumawat, for respondent No.2 Mr. Virendra Lodha, for respondent-3 (JDA) None appeared on behalf of respondent No.4 despite service. Counsel for petitioners inter-alia submits that petitioners were issued patta (lease deed) by JDA in a scheme having 60 ft. main road to its north but the Tribunal has passed an order behind their back on 24/08/08 reducing width of road from 60 ft to 30 ft and Smt. Renu Devi who was developer and Khatedar of their land in dispute as observed in para 6 of the judgment impugned was not even impleaded as one of respondents, and order has been passed by the Tribunal, by which petitioners are directly affected. Per contra, Counsel for respondent-2 submits that allotment, if any, made U/s 12(2) of the Act will not be of binding nature and respondent No.2 being owner of the land, without adopting procedure under law, cannot be compelled to surrender 30 ft width for road CW 10339/08 //2// out of his part of land in dispute and that apart, only direction given by the Tribunal is to re-consider the matter by JDA afresh as per guidelines as referred to in the judgment impugned. JDA (respondent-3 herein) has also filed CWP-3144/09 assailing self same judgment impugned herein. Counsel for JDA also submits that plans were approved only with 60 ft width road in question and only for this very reason respondent-2 (Developer) was asked to submit revised plans and only thereafter his maps can be considered by JDA. The questions raised herein require consideration. Heard. Admit. Fresh notices need not be issued to respondents who are duly represented by their respective counsel who may file additional reply if so desired. Issue notice to respondent No.4. As regards interim relief, taking note of rival contentions of the parties and material on record and without expressing any opinion on merits, interim order dt.23/09/08 staying operation of judgment dt.14/08/08 of respondent NO.1 Tribunal and directing both the parties to maintain status quo in respect CW 10339/08 //3// of the land in dispute, is hereby made absolute. Consequently, application dt.14/11/08 filed by respondent-2 U/Art.226(3) of the Constitution stands rejected and Stay Appl.- 2010/08 stands disposed of. Office is directed to place a copy of this order in file of stay application. Office to proceed. (Ajay Rastogi), J. K.Khatri/p3/ 10339CW08-Jul29-Adm-St.doc