1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR ORDER SB Civil Writ Petition No. 10423/2009 Gurdian International Pvt Ltd Vs The State of Rajasthan & ors 3.11.2010 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MN BHANDARI Mr Alok Sharma – for petitioner Mr GS Bapna, Advocate General – for respondents BY THE COURT: By this writ petition multiple prayers have been made. While hearing the matter at the initial stage interim order was passed. Respondents have now made an application for vacation of interim order. The matter has, accordingly, come up before this court. With the consent of learned counsel for parties, the matter has been heard finally. Learned counsel submits that petitioner company is not possessing excess land. It had, initially, purchased land measuring 17 bigha 10 biswa. Subsequently, under an agreement to sale, purchased additional land measuring 3 bigha 7 biswa. Petitioner is possessing land only to that extent and not in excess to it. Petitioner has been treated as encroacher on the government land based on new settlement proceedings. If petitioner's case is considered on the basis of old settlement proceedings then company is in rightful possession of the land to the extent indicated above. In case, petitioner is in possession of excess land, 2 it will vacate the same but measurement is required to be done by mechanism which would be even for ascertaining the location. This is apart from the fact that if at all petitioner is possessing some land as per old settlement proceedings, the government can take equivalent area of the land at the location which should have been possessed by the petitioner. Reply to the notice issued under section 91 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 (for short 'the Act') has already been submitted but matter has not been decided by the authorities concerned till date thus direction may be given as prayed under prayer clause (e ) of the writ petition. Learned Advocate General, appearing for the State, submits that petitioner is possessing around 22 bigha 10 biswa of land which is in excess to the land purchased. All the aspects and grounds raised by petitioner in this writ petition and urged before this court would be considered while deciding the matter pursuant to the notice under section 91 of the Act. If separate proceedings are pending with other authorities under sections 136 of the Act it would be dealt with separately. Petitioner may accordingly be directed to present itself before the revenue authorities hearing the matter under section 91 of the Act. This is more so when petitioner has already filed reply to the notice under section 91 of the Act. In the light of aforesaid, this writ petition is disposed 3 of with directions to the respondents authorities to decide the application made by the petitioner under section 136 of the Act so as the proceedings pending under section 91 of the Act. The matter may be decided after considering pleas raised by the petitioner herein which includes a dispute regarding old settlement proceedings and new settlement proceedings. In case it is found that petitioner is possessing land in excess to what has been stated by learned counsel for petitioner, then the government would be at liberty to take possession of the excess land. In that regard, if it is found that there is a dispute regarding location of land more specifically 3 bigha 7 biswa land, matter may be considered after taking possibility of exchange of land if it is available or is made available by petitioner company at nearby area. Necessary exercise may be undertaken within a time frame. application for vacation of stay order stands disposed of accordingly. (MN BHANDARI), J. bnsharma