[2025:RJ-JP:26056] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9468/2025 Om Prakash S/o Shri Giradhari Lal, Aged About 69 Years, R/o Ward No.-05, Gujaro Ki Dhani Shyonathpura, Tehsil Udaipurwati, District Jhunjhunu (Rajasthan). ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary To Government, Department Of Revenue, Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. District Collector, Jhunjhunu. 3. Sub-Division Officer, Udhaipurwati, District Jhunjhunu. 4. Tehsildar, Udaipurwati, District Jhunjhunu. 5. Nayab Tehsildar Gudhagaudji, District Jhunjhunu. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sultan Singh Kuri HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 14/07/2025 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite the fact that petitioner is in lawful possession of the land in question, notice under Section 91 of Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 has been issued to the petitioner. Counsel submits that petitioner submitted his reply to the said notice on 17.04.2025 but despite this, respondents are hell-bent to demolish the residence of the petitioner. Counsel submits that without deciding the reply/representation submitted by the petitioner, construction raised by the petitioner cannot be demolished. Counsel submits that it is settled law that if proceedings have been initiated against [2025:RJ-JP:26056] (2 of 2) [CW-9468/2025] any person and notice has been served upon him and reply has been submitted by the concerned person to the notice, authority is under statutory obligation to decide the same in accordance with law after taking into consideration the entire facts and grounds raised by the concerned person in his reply. Counsel submits that in these circumstances, respondents may be directed not to demolish the residence of the petitioner. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case as also considering the fact that reply to notice under Section 91 of Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 has already been submitted by the petitioner, I deem it just and proper to direct the respondents to conclude the proceedings within a period of ten weeks from today. Authority concerned is also directed to intimate the petitioner about the fate of the proceedings. In case, proceedings are concluded against the petitioner, respondents are directed to grant at least four weeks’ time to the petitioner to avail legal remedy before taking any coercive action. Till conclusion of the proceedings, parties are directed to maintain status quo with regard to the land in question. It is made clear that if proceedings are already concluded, this order will lose its currency. With the aforesaid directions, this civil writ petition stands disposed of. Stay application and pending application(s) (if any) also stand disposed of. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J LALIT MOHAN /38