1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ SPL. APPL. WRIT No. 274 of 1999 LRS OF HARBHAJ RAM & ORS V/S STATE & ORS Mr. VIJAY BISHNOI, for the appellant / petitioner Mr. Shyam Ladrecha, Govt. Counsel , for the respondent Date of Order : 22.7.2008 HON'BLE SHRI N P GUPTA,J. HON'BLE SHRI MANAK LALL MOHTA,J. ORDER ----- This appeal has been filed against the order of learned Single Judge dated 26.11.98, deciding the writ petition on merits, in absence. By the writ petition, the petitioner had challenged the order of the Board of Revenue, accepting the reference dated 12.05.92. The controversy was that according to petitioner, he was in possession of 12 bighas of land in murabba No.162/55 on chuck No. 5PSM, while in the revenue record 12 bighas in murabba No.162/63 has been said to be recorded, which came to be recorded as Government land, for which he initiated proceedings before the Assistant Colonisation Commissioner, who decided them by judgment and decree dated 12.05.92 accepting the petitioner's prayer . Again thereafter, in the year 1995, proceedings for reference were 2 initiated and a reference was made to the Board of Revenue, which has been accepted, setting aside the continuation of khatedari rights over the land in Murabba No.162/55. In our view, looking to the nature of controversy involved, in the interest of justice, the matter was required to be heard, with the active assistance of the learned counsel for the parties. In the appeal, it is contended that when the matter came up , the counsel for the present appellant was busy in connection with the Assembly Elections, wherein the father of the learned counsel was a candidate from Phalodi Constituency and, therefore, he could not happen to remain present. True it is that, even if the learned counsel was so busy, he was required to make appropriate alternative arrangements, at least for making a request in the court, for adjournment on that count. Considering the significant nature of the judgement, we are inclined to bear some benevolence. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. The impugned order is set aside, and the matter is restored to the original file of the learned Single Judge at the stage, before passing of the order impugned. The learned Single Judge is, accordingly,directed to proceed ahead with the matter, from the stage as it existed before 26.11.98. The parties to appear before the learned Single 3 Judge on 11.08.2008. Fresh notice need not be issued. ( MANAK LALL MOHTA ),J. ( N P GUPTA ),J. /l.george /