SBCWP No.11986/10. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.11986/2010. Lala & Ors. Vs. The Board of Revenue, Ajmer & Ors. Date of Order:- December 18, 2010. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri M.M. Ranjan and Shri S.K. Budania for the petitioners. Shri Hemraj Gaur for the respondents. ******* BY THE COURT:- Writ petition has been filed by the petitioners aggrieved by the order of the Board of Revenue, which has partly allowed the appeal filed by respondent-Gulabo. Appeal was filed by him against the order of the revenue appellate authority dated 10/5/2005. The revenue appellate authority held that the respondent procured the allotment by exercising fraud because he had 18 bighas 17 biswa of land in his khata at the time of allotment whereas, allotment was made on the basis of assertion that he had only 7 bigha and 10 biswa of land. Contention of the learned counsel for petitioners is that the appeal should have been dismissed and the matter should not have been remanded to the Additional Collector because SBCWP No.11986/10. 2 admittedly respondent has 18 bighas and 17 biswa of land and therefore he could not be considered as landless person for the purpose of allotment of land in view of Rule 14 of the Rajasthan Allotment of Agriculture Land Rules, 1970. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submitted the documents, which the petitioners produced before the revenue appellate authority regarding other land of the petitioner, which pertained to land of his brother, who expired two years after allotment in question and therefore on the date of allotment, there was no fraud. Having regard to the arguments aforesaid, I find that the Board of Revenue has passed a just and proper order, which in the circumstances of the case could possibly be the only order to have been passed as the matter has simply been remanded to the Additional Collector, Dausa to re-examine whether or not on the date on which allotment made in favour of the respondent, he was a landless person. I therefore do not find any infirmity in the impugned-order. Writ petition is therefore dismissed. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. anil