[2025:RJ-JP:15299] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9652/2007 Ginni Devi (Died) through her Lrs. 1/1 Jagdish Prasad Son of Late Sh. Radhey Shyam 1/2 Shyam Sunder Son of Late Sh. Radhey Shyam 1/3 Manohar Lal Son of Late Sh. Radhey Shyam 1/4 Subhash Son of Late Sh. Radhey Shyam 1/5 Saroj Daughter of Late Sh. Radhey Shyam 1/6 Sajna Daughter of Late Sh. Radhey Shyam All are residents of Chirawa, District Jhunjhunu (Rajasthan) ----Petitioners Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan Through The District Collector, Jhunjhunu.Rajasthan. 2. The Sub Divisional Officer, Chirawa, District Jhunjhunu.Rajasthan.. 3. The Tehsildar, Chirawa, District Jhunjhunu.Rajasthan. ...Respondents 4. Shri Gopal Swaroop Bhardwaj S/o Shri Murlidhar Brahmin, Sultana At Present Chirawa, Tehsil Chirawa, District Jhunjhunu Rajasthan. ---Proforma-Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Devendra Sharma and Mr. Aditya Mitruka For Respondent(s) : Ms. Gunjan Chawla and Mr. P.L. Bairwa for Mr. Neeraj Batra, GC Mr. Kaleem Ahmed Khan HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL Judgment / Order 04/04/2025 This writ petition is directed against the order dated 22.10.2007 passed by the District Collector, Jhunjhunu under Section 285(2) of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 1959 (for short, “Act of 1959”) whereby, it has confirmed the order dated [2025:RJ-JP:15299] (2 of 2) [CW-9652/2007] 07.09.2006 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Chirawa under Section 285(1) of the Act of 1959. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits, inter alia, relying upon a co-ordinate Bench judgment of this Court passed in the case of Bhanwarlal vs. State: 1996 (1) WLC 710, that it is the State Government and not the District Collector who is authorised under Section 285(2) of the Act of 1959 to pass the confirmation order and in view thereof, since, in the instant case, the order impugned dated 22.10.2007 has been passed by the District Collector, it is not tenable in the eye of law. The aforesaid proposition is not disputed by the learned counsels for the respondents. In view thereof, this writ petition deserves to be allowed. Resultantly, this writ petition is allowed. The order impugned dated 22.10.2007 is quashed and set aside. (MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J DIKSHA /36