1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.16453/2010 Smt. Kesar Devi & Ors. vs. State & Ors. Date of order : 15/12/2010. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri Pradeep Lata Mathur for the petitioners. ****** Petitioners have come against the show cause notice issued to them by Tehsildar Pipleda, District Kota. Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the land in dispute was alloted to the predecessor-in-title of the petitioners in the year 1975. As per the policy of the government vide Annexure-2, this land was a surplus land resumed by the Government in ceiling proceedings from Gajanand. Sons of Gajanand i.e. Dev Karan, Ram Chandra and Purshottam filed application 17 years thereafter before the SDO that the ceiling proceedings are reopened and that they should be treated as independent witness and it must be held that the land was not held in surplus. The petitioners applied for their impleadment in those proceedings, however, their application filed under Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC was rejected. The petitioners thereagainst filed the writ petition. The writ petition was also dismissed holding that the petitioners were not necessary party to such proceedings. Petitioners thereafter filed special appeal against the judgement of the learned Single Judge before the division bench. However, that appeal has been dismissed in default. Petitioners have filed application for 2 restoration of appeal in which notices have been issued to the respondents. Even before the appeal would be restored, the Tehsildar has issued show cause notice to the petitioners calling upon them to appear before him on 4.10.2010. The Tehsildar has fixed the matter in January, 2011 and the restoration application is also coming up on 5.1.2010. In my considered view for an issue which is pending before the division bench, filing of writ petition is wholly misconceived. In the first place, this will have to be decided by this Court whether or not petitioners are a necessary party and since the impugned show cause notice is consequence of the proceedings initiated at the instance of sons of Gajanand, the petitioners may in the appeal raise all the questions including the impugned proceedings. In the restoration application also, they can seek interim protection pending appeal. The writ petition is dismissed with the aforesaid liberty to the petitioners. However, it is expected of the Tehsildar not to go ahead with the proceedings of eviction till disposal of the restoration application or subject to what order is passed by division bench. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. RS/-