[2025:RJ-JP:11237] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8920/2008 Gordhan Singh, aged about 47 years, Son Of Shri Bajrang Singh, Chechat, Tehsil Ramganj Mandi, District Kota. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Board Of Revenue For Rajasthan, Ajmer 2. Revenue Appellate Authority, Kota 3. Sub Divisional Officer, Ramganj Mandi, District Kota 4. State Of Rajasthan Through Sub Divisional Officer, Ramganj Mand, Dist- Kota 5. Nand Singh, Son Of Shri Bajrang Singh, resident of Chechat, Tehsil Ramganj Mandi, District Kota. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jag Mohan Saxena For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL Judgment / Order 11/03/2025 This writ petition is directed against the orders dated 22.05.2008 and dated 01.02.2006 passed by the Board of Revenue Rajasthan, Ajmer (for brevity, “the BoR”) whereby, the review petition as also the second appeal respectively, preferred by the petitioner have been dismissed. The relevant facts in brief are that vide its letter dated 29.06.1998, the Naib Tehsildar, Sub Tehsil Chechat, District Kota recommended for regularisation of old possession of the petitioner over three bigha land out of khasra No.1276 village Chechat on the basis that he is a landless agriculturist. However, the [2025:RJ-JP:11237] (2 of 3) [CW-8920/2008] recommendation was rejected by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Ramganj Mandi, District Kota vide its order dated 30.06.2000 holding that the petitioner never cultivated the subject land rather, he deals in the business of stones. It was further held that the land of khasra No.1276 has been reserved by the District Collector, Kota for Government Offices and residences. The Revenue Appellate Authority, Kota dismissed the appeal preferred thereagainst by the petitioner vide its order dated 11.06.2001 and the second appeal preferred thereagainst was also dismissed by the BoR vide order dated 01.02.2006. A review petition filed by the petitioner came to be rejected by the BoR vide order dated 22.05.2008. Assailing the order, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the revenue Courts have failed to appreciate that he was a landless agriculturist and being in old possession of the subject property, was entitled for its regularisation in his favour. He, therefore, prays that the order dated 22.05.2008 as also the order dated 01.02.2006 passed by BoR be quashed and set aside and the subject land be regularised in his favour as recommended by the Naib Tehsildar vide letter dated 29.06.1998. Heard. Considered. There are concurrent findings of facts against the petitioner by three Forums that he is not an agriculturist; rather, a businessman dealing in stones, the land is in possession of the State Government after his dispossession and subject land has been allotted/reserved for construction of Government Offices and residences. In view thereof, the BoR did not err in dismissing the appeal as also the review petition filed by the petitioner. The [2025:RJ-JP:11237] (3 of 3) [CW-8920/2008] aforesaid findings based on material on record have not been demonstrated to be suffering from any illegality or perversity so as to warrant interference of this Court under its limited supervisory jurisdiction vide Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Resultantly, this writ petition is dismissed being devoid of merit. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J YOGESH/54