[2025:RJ-JP:4365-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition (PIL) No. 1294/2018 1. Roshan Lal Son Of Shri Hari Ram, R/o Village Rahmanpura, District Bharatpur. 2. Deen Dayal Son Of Shri Vijay Singh, R/o 1/1290, Village Kamalpura, Post Murawara, District Bharatpur Raj. 3. Girraj Son Of Shri Kallan, R/o Village Rahmanpura, District Bharatpur Rajasthan 4. Miththu Ram Son Of Shri Chhitar, R/o Village Kamalpura Road, District Bharatpur Rajasthan. 5. Laxman Singh Son Of Shri Kare Lal, R/o Nagla Jaghina, District Bharatpur. ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan Through Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur 2. The Divisional Commissioner, Bharatpur. 3. The Collector, Bharatpur Rajasthan. 4. The Commanding Officer, Headquarter Defence, Bharatpur Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Raj Kumar Goyal For Respondent(s) : Mr. G.S. Gill, AAG with Ms. Shikha Sharma Mr. R.D. Rastogi, ASG, Sr. Adv., with Mr. Sumit Teterwal, Sr. CGPC Mr. Ashish Kumar, CGC Mr. Vaibhav Bhansali Mr. Chinmay Sharma [2025:RJ-JP:4365-DB] (2 of 4) [CW-1294/2018] HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR Order 31/01/2025 This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners with the following prayers:- "(i) by an appropriate writ of mandamus, order or direction, concerned authorities be directed to not construct the wall on public way (path) on disputed public way (path) in Khasra No.383 situated at village Golpura, District Bharatpur. (ii) Cost of the petition be awarded in favour of the petitioners. (iii) Any other appropriate writ, order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be passed in favour of the petitioners." Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondent No.4 has encroached over the public way and closed the way. He further submits that the petitioners are using the public way since the year 1934. Mr. R.D. Rastogi, learned Additional Solicitor General appearing on behalf of the respondent No.4 submits that the reply to the writ petition has been filed on behalf of the respondent No.4 along with documents, in which, he states that the land in dispute was handed over to the Ministry of Defense way back in the year 1950 and the record submitted by the respondent No.4 also clearly shows that the land in dispute including the public way was handed over to the Ministry of Defense for military purposes. He further relied upon the judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Union of India & Another Vs. S. [2025:RJ-JP:4365-DB] (3 of 4) [CW-1294/2018] Narasimhulu Naidu (Dead) Through Legal reported in (2021) 20 SCC 321, where in para No.47 it has been held as under:- "47. Apart from the fact that the transfer of title in favour of the Union is complete when the possession was delivered, but even thereafter, the military land register and general land registered produced by the appellants shows the possession of the appellants over such land. The military land register and general land register are public documents within the meaning of Section 74 of the Evidence Act, 1872 (Evidence Act) containing the records of the acts of the sovereign authority i.e. the Union as well as official body. Still further, Section 114 of the Evidence Act grants presumption of correctness being an official act having been regularly performed. Therefore, in the absence of any evidence to show that such records were not maintained properly, the official record containing entries of ownership and possession would carry the presumption of correctness. In view of the transfer of land on 10.10.1956 followed by delivery of possession on 19.03.1958 and continuous assertion of possession thereof, it leads to the unequivocal finding that the appellants are owners and in possession of the suit land." Mr. G.S. Gill, learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of the respondents No.1 to 3 submits that the land in dispute belongs to the respondent no.4 and the respondent No.4 has rightly constructed the wall over the land in dispute which has already been handed over to the Ministry of Defense way back in the year 1950. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. We have considered the submissions made on behalf of the respondents that the land in dispute has been recorded in the [2025:RJ-JP:4365-DB] (4 of 4) [CW-1294/2018] name of Ministry of Defense and the same was also handed over to the Ministry of Defense for the military purposes in the year 1950, therefore, in view of the judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Union of India & Another (supra), no case is made out for interference by this Court in this writ petition. Hence, the present writ petition stands dismissed. (PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR),J (INDERJEET SINGH),J Upendra Pratap Singh /78