[2025:RJ-JP:28306] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8100/2025 1. Mohan Lal Sharma S/o Late Sh. Udda Lal Sharma, Aged About 58 Years, R/o Bhanpura, Panchayat Gothara, Tehsil Uniyara, District Tonk, Rajasthan. 2. Sohan Lal Sharma S/o Late Sh. Udda Lal Sharma, Aged About 55 Years, R/o Bhanpura, Panchayat Gothara, Tehsil Uniyara, District Tonk, Rajasthan. 3. Tara Chand Sharma S/o Late Sh. Udda Lal Sharma, Aged About 52 Years, R/o Bhanpura, Panchayat Gothara, Tehsil Uniyara, District Tonk, Rajasthan. ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through District Collector, Tonk, Rajasthan. 2. Sub Divisional Magistrate, Uniyara, District Tonk, Rajasthan. 3. Tehsildar Nagarfort, District Tonk, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. T.C.Sharma Mr Lokendra Sharma For Respondent(s) : JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 28/07/2025 1. Aggrieved by the order dated 16.05.2025 passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Uniyara District Tonk, (for short, ‘the SDM’)the instant writ petition has been filed. 2. By passing the aforesaid order, the SDM has directed the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Uniyara to provide police force to the Tehsildar to remove encroachment from the subject land. [2025:RJ-JP:28306] (2 of 3) [CW-8100/2025] 3. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are in possession of the subject land since time immemorial and the civil dispute with respect to the subject land are pending before the Competent Court, hence under such circumstances, there was no reason or occasion with the SDM to pass the impugned order, hence interference of this Court is warranted. 4. Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on record. 5. It appears that the impugned order dated 16.05.2025 has been passed by the SDM in terms of the impugned notice dated 07.01.2025 issued by the Tehsildar, Nagar Fort, District Tonk under Section 91 of the Rajatshan Land Revenue Act, 1956 (for short, ‘the Act of 1956’). 6. In the considered opinion of this Court, the petitioners are supposed to approach the Appellate Authority, challenging the validity of the original notice issued to the petitioners under Section 91 of the Act of 1956 along with the order dated 16.05.2025. Whenever alternative remedy is available to a person, he cannot be allowed to bypass the jurisdiction of the said Appellate Authority. 7. On this count alone, the present writ petition stands disposed of granting liberty to the petitioners to file statutory appeal against the impugned order and notice before the Appellate Authority. In case, such appeal is preferred by the petitioners within a period of seven days from today, it is expected from the authorities concerned to decide the same expeditiously as early as possible. In case any stay application is preferred by the [2025:RJ-JP:28306] (3 of 3) [CW-8100/2025] petitioners, the same would be decided by the Appellate Authority expeditiously. 8. Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Ashu//14