1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. CIVIL SPECIAL APPEAL (WRIT) NO.855 of 2007 For Approval and Signature : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.M.PANCHAL HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS ====================================================== 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ====================================================== Arjun Singh & Ors.- Appellant Versus State of Rajasthan & Ors. - Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : Mr. Sajjan Singh, for the appellants. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.M.PANCHAL and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS Date : OCTOBER 1, 2007 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.M.PANCHAL) The instant appeal is directed against judgment dated August 8, 2007 rendered by the learned Single Judge in S.B. Civil Writ Petition no.593/06 by which the prayer made by the appellant to set aside 2 order dated September 30, 2005 passed by the Collector, Pali setting aside the resolution dated June 27, 1999 relating to allotment of land in favour of the respondent and directing the Gram Panchayat to decide the issue afresh after affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned, is refused. The case of the appellant is that he engaged the respondent no.2 as Pujari of the temple which is public property but the respondent no.2 got the Patta in his name from the Gram Panchayat without due process of law which was illegal. Feeling aggrieved by the issuance of Patta in favour of the respondent no.2, the villagers filed revision before the District Collector, Pali. The Collector by order dated September 30, 2005 set aside the resolution dated June 27, 1999 relating to allotment of land to the respondent no.2 and directed the Gram Panchayat to decide the issue afresh after affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned. Thereupon, the appellant invoked extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution by filing S.B. Civil Writ Petition no.593/2006 and claimed the relief which is referred to earlier. The learned Single Judge has rejected the petition by order dated August 8, 2007 giving rise to the instant appeal. This Court has heard the learned counsel for the appellant and considered the documents forming part of the petition. The plea that the Collector, Pali had no jurisdiction under Section 97 of the Rajasthan Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 to remit the whole matter for reconsideration of the Gram Panchayat, and therefore 3 the appeal should be entertained, has no substance. Section 97 of the Act reads as under:- “97. Power of revision and review by Government.-(1) The State Government may, either of its own motion or on an application from any person interested, call for and examine the record of a Panchayati Raj Institution or of a Standing Committee or sub-committee thereof in respect of any proceedings to satisfy itself as to the correctness, legality or propriety of any decision or order passed therein or as to the regularity of such proceedings and, if in any case, it appears to the State Government that any such decision or order should be modified, annulled, reversed or remitted for reconsideration, it may pass orders accordingly: Provided that the State Government shall not pass any order prejudicial to any part unless such party has had a reasonable opportunity of being heard in the matter. (2) The State Government may stay the execution of any such decision or order prejudicial to any party, pending the exercise of its powers under sub-section (1) in respect, thereof. (3) The State Government may, of its own motion or on an application received from any person interested, at any time, within ninety days of the passing of an order under sub-section (1), review any such order if it was passed by it under any mistake, whether of fact or of law, or in ignorance of any material fact. The provisions contained in the proviso to sub-section (1) and in section (2) shall apply to a proceeding under this sub- section.” A bare perusal of the said section makes it very evident that it permits the State Government or Collector to call for and examine the record of Panchayat Raj Institution or of a Standing Committee or sub-committee thereof in respect of any proceedings to satisfy itself as to correctness, legality or propriety of any decision or order passed therein. The revisional authority is conferred the power to modify, annul or reverse the order concerned or to remit the 4 matter for reconsideration of the authority concerned. The plea that the remittance could have been only of an issue while retaining the main matter with the revisional authority and therefore the order impugned in the petition should have been set aside by the learned Single Judge, cannot be accepted. The word 'remittance' used in the section by the legislature is equivalent to the word 'remand' which is used in the Code of Civil Procedure and other provisions of law. The legislature has employed the phrase “remitted for reconsideration” which would include power to remand the whole matter for reconsideration of the authority concerned. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that a just order has been passed by the Collector, and therefore the learned Single Judge was justified in not entertaining the petition. No ground is made out by the learned counsel for the appellant to interfere with the judgment impugned in the instant appeal, and therefore the appeal which lacks merits, deserves dismissal. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal fails and is dismissed. [GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS],J. [J.M.PANCHAL],CJ. Praveen 5 D.B. CIVIL MISC. STAY APPLICATION NO.4841/07 IN D.B.CIVIL SPECIAL APPEAL(W)NO.855/2007 Arjun Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan DATE OF ORDER :: 01-10-2007 HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. J.M. PANCHAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS Mr. Sajjan Singh, for the appellant. As the appeal is dismissed by a speaking order dated October 1, 2007, the instant application for interim relief does not survive. Hence, the stay application is also rejected. [GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS],J. [J.M.PANCHAL],CJ. Praveen.