HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4290/2003 Raghuveer Singh Son Of Shri Swaroop Singh, Resident Of Bawdikheda Tehsil And District Baran. ----Petitioner Versus 1. The Board Of Revenue, Ajmer, Rajasthan. 2. The Revenue Appellate Authority, Kota. 3. The District Collector, Baran. 4. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Land Revenue Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur. 5. The Addl Collector, Baran, District Baran. 6. The Tehsildar, Baran District Baran. 7. Dwarki Lal Son Of Jagan Nath, Resident Of Aked Tehsil Baran District Baran. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vijay Choudhary Mr. Ran Singh For Respondent(s) : Mr. G.P. Kaushik Mr. V.D.Gathala-AGC JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 17/09/2025 1 The instant writ petition has been filed against the impugned order dated 04/03/1997 passed by the District Collector, Baran by which the application filed by the petitioner under Rule 14(4) of the Rajasthan Land Revenue (Allotment of Land for Agricultural Purposes) Rules, 1970 (for short, ‘the Rules of 1970’) has been rejected. 2. Leaned counsel for the petitioner submits that the subject land was allotted to the petitioner but subsequently allotment of (2 of 2) [CW-4290/2003] the same was cancelled, hence, aggrieved by the aforesaid action of the respondents, the petitioner approached the District Collector by way of filing an application under Rule 14(4) of the Rules of 1970 but the said application has been rejected and the aforesaid order passed by the Collector has been assailed before the first and the second Appellate Authority, however those appeals were also rejected. Counsel submits that as per the rule, the petitioner is entitled to get the restoration of his allotment. 3. At the outset, counsel for the respondents submits that the subject land has been allotted to Samudrabai wife of Ramgopal. Hence, under the changed circumstances, no cause of action survives with the petitioner to continue with this petition. 4. Considering the above factual aspect of the matter and the statement made by the counsel for the respondents, this Court is of the view that the cause of action as indicated in this writ petition has become infructuous, hence this petition has become infructuous. The petitioner would be at liberty to assail the allotment order made in favour of Samudrabai by way of availing appropriate remedy under the law. 5. Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stands dismissed. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Ashu/21