1 4 D.B. CIVIL SPECIAL APPEAL (W) NO. 659/2001. Gram Panchayat, Aabrar Vs. Janki Das & Ors. ... Date of Order :: 10th August 2010. HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. TOTLA Mr. R.S. Choudhary, for the appellant. Mr. N.M. Lodha, for the respondent No.1 <><> BY THE COURT: By way of this intra-court appeal, the appellant Gram Panchayat, Aabrar (now Gram Panchayat, Randhisar) seeks to question the order dated 04.05.2001 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in CWP No. 183/1997. By the impugned order, the learned Single Judge proceeded to allow the writ petition filed by the respondent No.1 Janki Das against the order dated 17.10.1996 passed by the Collector, Churu whereby the patta granted in favour of the writ petitioner free of cost as a member of Backward Class under the concerned scheme meant for such class of persons was ordered to be set aside. The learned Single Judge found the order passed by the Collector, Churu groundless and unsustainable; and proceeded to quash the same. During the course of submissions in this appeal, it transpired that the same order dated 04.05.2001 as impugned in this appeal was indeed subjected to intra-court appeal by the other respondent in the writ petition, the complainant, who had preferred the revision petition before the Collector concerned; and the said appeal, being SAW No. 675/2001, 2 came to be dismissed by a Division Bench of this Court in limine on 03.09.2001. For the facts as surfaced during the course of hearing, the record of the aforesaid SAW No. 675/2001 was requisitioned from the record-room. A perusal of the record of SAW No.675/2001 makes out that while dismissing the said appeal, the Division Bench precisely concurred with the findings of the learned Single Judge in the impugned order dated 04.05.2001 and held that the authorities below had rightly granted patta to the writ petitioner. The Division Bench said,- “We are in entire agreement with the finding recorded by the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge, on consideration of the entire material placed before him, came to the conclusion that the first respondent Janki Das is entitled for patta and that the authorities below have rightly granted such patta to a landless person. In the result, the appeal fails and is dismissed. The order passed by the learned Single Judge is affirmed.” In view of the findings so recorded by the coordinate Division Bench in relation to the very same impugned order dated 04.05.2001, we find little scope or justification to consider interference in this intra-court appeal at the instance of the Gram Panchayat who alone had issued the patta in question and who was not the complainant before the Collector. It is also noticed that, in fact, there was taken up earlier a revision petition before the Collector, Churu bearing number 16/1995 by the same complainant against the same patta that came to be rejected on 19.10.1995. This fact was precisely 3 noticed by the Administrative Committee of Panchayat Samiti in its order dated 10.06.1996. It appears that the learned Collector while passing the impugned order dated 17.10.1996 even ignored such a relevant fact of previous revision petition against the same patta having been dismissed. Taking a comprehensive view of the matter, we find absolutely no ground to show interference in this intra-court appeal at the instance of the appellant Gram Panchayat. Accordingly and as a result of the aforesaid, the appeal fails and is, therefore, dismissed. However, in the circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. (C.M. TOTLA), J. (DINESH MAHESHWARI), J. Mohan/