CW 5305/07 //1// In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Jaipur Bench ** Civil Writ Petition No.5305/2007 Girdhari & Hema Ram Versus District Collector, Sikar & Others. Date of Order ::: 06/05/09 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi Mr. Anoop Dhand, for petitioner Instant petition is directed against order dt.20/06/07 (Ann.7) whereby Patta No.58 for allotment of plot measuring 384 sq. yards issued way back on 20/05/86 in favour of respondent Nos.4 & 5 was upheld by Collector, Sikar but no finding was recorded with regard to so-called encroachment, against which grievance has been raised by petitioner herein. Respondent NO.4 & 5 were issued a Patta NO.58 on 20/05/86 for allotment of land measuring 384 sq. yards by Gram Panchayat Kochhar Panchayat Samiti Dantaramgarh (respondent No.3), which was challenged in appeal by petitioner on 18/10/2004 on the premise that at the time of allotment, they had furnished an undertaking to remove certain encroachments existing adjacent to the allotted land but it was not removed; as such they violated terms & conditions of allotment. At the same time, it was submitted that very allotment made was in violation of Rajasthan CW 5305/07 //2// Panchayat Rules, 1961 which were applicable at the time of allotment. Administrative standing committee of Panchayat Samiti (respondent NO.2) allowed the appeal preferred by petitioner on 20/11/04 (Ann.5) whereby Patta NO.58 issued for allotment of plot in favour of respondent Nos. 3 & 4 herein after almost 18 years of its issuance was cancelled on the premise that allottees violated terms & condition of allotment and certain encroachments despite having furnished undertaking were not removed by them. Against aforesaid order (Ann.5), respondents No.4 & 5 preferred revision before District Collector, Sikar, who taking note of material on record, finally observed that looking to long possession of 40 years of respondent Nos.4 & 5, Gram Panchayat in its meeting dt.14/05/86 considered it appropriate to allot a plot measuring 384 sq. yards, in pursuance whereof, Patta NO.58 was issued on 20/05/86. Further reference was also made of an undertaking furnished with regard to removal of alleged slobe (Khura) situated at the allotted land but taking note of nature of undertaking disclosing dimensions made of the land in dispute wherein it has been pointed out that alleged encroachment is in no case related to the plot allotted to respondent Nos.4 & 5 way CW 5305/07 //3// back in May, 1986 and no adverse inference could be drawn from alleged undertaking which can be considered to be the basis for cancellation of patta in question; and consequently, allowed revision petition of respondents and while upholding patta dt.20/05/86 in question allotted in their favour on the premise that their patta could not have been cancelled merely on the basis of alleged encroachment if at all there was any. However it was made clear by the respondents authority that it would be free to take appropriate action for removal of alleged encroachment, if at all there is any, in accordance with law. I have heard counsel for the petitioner and find no manifest error in the findings recorded under order impugned which may call for interference. Consequently, writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed. (Ajay Rastogi), J. K.Khatri/p.3/5305CW07May06.doc