1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR O R D E R S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.1796/2007 (Takhat Singh Vs. State & Ors.) Date of order : 18.03.2008 P R E S E N T HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS Mr. R.S. Mankad, for the petitioner. Mr. T. Gupta, for UIT. Heard learned counsel for the parties. By way of filing the present writ petition, the petitioner has made a prayer for direction to release the land of the petitioner from acquisition. Admittedly, earlier the said acquisition proceedings were challenged not only by the petitioner but also by a number of persons by way of filing SB Civil Writ Petition No.5330/90 along with twelve other writ petition. The said writ petitions were disposed of by this Court vide order dated 10.3.1998. While disposing of the said writ petition, it was observed by this Court as follows : 2 “The writ petitions are disposed of as above. The respondents are directed to keep in view while raising construction on the land that the environmental balance of the area is not disturbed which may be done by keeping intact the old trees standing on the land.” The aforesaid order dated 10.3.1998 passed by learned Single Judge was further challenged by way of filing special appeals before Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court. Hon'ble Division Bench while dismissing the special appeals upheld the order dated 10.3.1998 passed by learned Single Judge. The said order is placed on record as Annexure-2. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that even after rejection of the writ petition as well as special appeal, still the land which has been acquired is not used by the Government and the same is in the possession of the petitioner, so also, the respondents are violating the observations made by learned Single Judge of this Court vide order dated 10.3.1998. Therefore, representations were filed by the petitioners to be State Government raising the above objections, so also it was specifically stated in the representation that some other land which is acquired by the Government was released from the acquisition. Therefore, it was prayed by the petitioner in the representation that his land may 3 also be released from acquisition because he has developed a horticulture farm upon the said land. This Court fails to understand how the petitioner is still in possession of the land in question even after acquisition and dismissal of special appeal in the year 2002. Such contention made by learned counsel for the petitioner cannot be accepted for want of any documentary evidence. However, if the petitioner has made any representation before the State Government then, it is for the Government to decide whether to release the land from acquisition or not. It is admitted fact of the case that the land was transferred to UIT, Udaipur and UIT, Udaipur is in possession of the said land. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case, it is apparent that earlier the acquisition proceedings were upheld by learned Single Judge as well as by Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court. Thus, it is not in the domain of this Court to review the aforesaid orders passed by learned Single Judge and Hon'ble Division Bench. The petitioner at the strength of observation made in para No.42 of the order dated 10.3.1998 passed by learned Single Judge cannot claim any right upon the land, which has already been acquired by Government. In these circumstances, there is no force in 4 the writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. (GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS), J. arun