[2025:RJ-JP:21700] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5740/2025 1. Ashok Rathi S/o Shri Ramgopal Bohra, Bhartpur Picture Palace, Kumher Gate, Bharatpur, At Present Resident Of 3/101, Bhanpada, Agra (Uttar Pradesh). 2. Manoj Sharma S/o Shri Chandramani Sharma, Aged About 52 Years, R/o Bhartpur Picture Palace, Kumher Gate, Bharatpur, ----Petitioners Versus 1. Municipal Corporation, Bharatpur Through The Commissioner, Office Of Municipal Corporation, Bharatpur. 2. The Director, Local Bodies, Rajasthan, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr.J. P. Goyal with Mr.Abhi Goyal For Respondent(s) : Mr.J. K. Moolchandani JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 23/05/2025 1. By way of filing of this writ petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned orders dated 04.04.2025 & 05.04.2025 passed by the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Bharatpur (for short ‘the Corporation’), by which lease issued in favour of the petitioners has been cancelled by the Corporation in exercise of its powers contained under Section 73(2)(B) of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 2009 (for short ‘the Act of 2009’). 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that for cancellation of the lease deed, a suit was filed by the respondents before the Court of Civil Judge, Bharatpur and during pendency of [2025:RJ-JP:21700] (2 of 3) [CW-5740/2025] the same, the order impugned has been passed. Counsel submits that on the next day i.e. on 20.03.2025, the building of the petitioners was demolished and notices had been issued to auction the land of the petitioners by publication on 26.03.2025. Counsel submits that under these circumstances, interference of this Court is warranted. 3. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents opposed the prayer and submitted that the impugned orders dated 04.04.2025 & 05.04.2025 is revisable under Section 327 of the Act of 2009 and without availing the statutory remedy of filing revision petition before the Revisional Authority, the petitioners have straightaway approached this Court by way of filing the instant petition. Counsel further submits that the lease was granted to the petitioners for a specific purpose of running the school, but the leased property was not used and utilized for the said purpose, hence, the lease granted in favour of the petitioners was cancelled vide impugned orders dated 04.04.2025 & 05.04.2025, hence, this petition is liable to be rejected on this count alone. 4. Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on the record. 5. Without going into the merits, right, title and interest of the parties involved, but looking to the fact that the orders dated 04.04.2025 & 05.04.2025 passed by the Corporation is revisable under Section 327 of the Act of 2009, this Court refrains from entertaining the same on its merits, but by looking to the fact that the orders impugned was passed on 04.04.2025 & 05.04.2025, the demolition was done immediately on the next date and 05 days thereafter, the auction notices have been issued without [2025:RJ-JP:21700] (3 of 3) [CW-5740/2025] giving breathing time to the petitioners to avail the remedies available to him under the law i.e. filing of revision petition under Section 327 of the Act of 2009, this Court deems it just and proper to dispose of the instant writ petition granting liberty to the petitioners to file statutory revision petition under Section 327 of the Act of 2009 before the Revisional Authority. 6. 6. In case, the petitioners file a revision petition within a period of 15 days from today, it is expected from the Revisional Authority to decide the same expeditiously, as early as possible, preferably within a period of three months thereafter. 7. Till four months, no coercive action be taken against the petitioners. 8. The Revisional Authority would be at liberty to decide the revision petition on its merits without being influenced by any of the observations made by this Court. 9. The stay application and all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Aayush Sharma /188