1 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.4094/2007 (Laxmi Narayan Vs. Ramesh Chandra & Ors.) Date of order :: 22.02.2008 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS Mr.M.Pitaliya, for the petitioner. Mr.Prabhat Ojha, for the respondents. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order dated 21.02.2006, whereby the learned Revenue Board, Rajasthan, Ajmer while setting aside the order dated 31.12.2004 passed by the learned Revenue Appellate Authority, restored the order dated 26.07.2003 passed by the Assistant Collector, Chhoti Sadari in the application filed by the petitioner under Section 212 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, in which the learned trial court has refused to appoint receiver. After perusing the impugned orders and considering the entire record, I see no reason to 2 interfere with the writ petition while exercising power under Section 227 of the Constitution of India, because both the orders are elaborate orders and passed after considering the material facts of the case. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. However, the prayer of the petitioner for depositing cash security as compensation is rejected because admittedly out of Rs.60,000/- agreed by the petitioner for the agreement, the respondents have already paid Rs.40,000/- to him and the suit preferred by the petitioner is under adjudication before the S.D.O., Nimbahera. (GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS), J. A.K. Chouhan/-