1 1. S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2382/2008 Khiya Ram & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. 2. S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2383/2008 Kailash Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. DATE OF ORDER :: 09-04-2008 HON'BLE MR. MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI,J. Ms. Bita Sipani, for the petitioners. These two writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners apprehending auction of the land so allotted to them by the UIT itself vide Annexure-2. It is contended that the petitioners were in possession of the land in dispute and taking note of the survey report, office of the UIT, Bikaner issued Pattas in favour of survey holders and one of the Patta issued in favour of the petitioner has been placed on record as Annexure-2. It is contended that now vide Annex.3, the land so allotted to the petitioner is put for auction by the UIT itself. Though from the writ petitions, it is not come out that the land so allotted to the petitioner is put for auction but there is averment to the effect that the houses constructed by the petitioners in the land in dispute are being marked with red ink and thus, petitioner is having apprehension of demolition of their plots. The writ petitions have been preferred without making a 2 representation to the respondents. It is contended that looking to the fact that auction notice was issued by the respondents on 15.3.2008 thus the petitioners were not having sufficient time. The aforesaid argument cannot be accepted because petitioners were having sufficient time to make a representation to the respondents as auction notice was issued on 15.3.2008. It is contended that a joint representation was given by the holders of the land of Kacchi Basti but that representation has also not been placed on record. In any case, since the petitioners were given Patta by the UIT itself, thus other than the land so allotted to the petitioners if there exist land then it can always be put for auction but at the same time, the plot of land allotted to the petitioners cannot be put for auction unless Pattas are cancelled or the land is acquired. Since the things are not very clear as to whether the land allotted to the petitioners itself is going to auction, the petitioners are directed to make a representation to the respondents UIT and the UIT is directed to consider the representation and if it is found that the land put for auction includes the land legally allotted to the petitioners and Pattas are not otherwise cancelled or land is not otherwise acquired, obvious consequence is that the land so allotted 3 cannot be put for auction. However, all this is required to be looked into by the UIT itself, therefore while this writ petition is not maintained at this stage, respondents are expected to decide the representation so made by the petitioners before taking any other action pursuant to the auction notice. It is further expected that if the land put for auction includes the land allotted to the weaker section who were residing in Kacchi Basti, respondent UIT will not take further action in the matter. With the aforesaid observations, these writ petitions are disposed of. [Munishwar Nath Bhandari],J. Praveen