[2025:RJ-JP:25638] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10199/2025 1. Sanjay S/o Shri Ruda Ram, Aged About 35 Years, Resident Of Village - Dhod, Sikar, Rajasthan-332002. 2. Kalu S/o Shri Jodha Ram, Aged About 60 Years, Resident Of Village - Dhod, Sikar, Rajasthan-332002. ----Petitioners Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. District Collector, Sikar (Raj.) 3. Tehsildar, Dhod, District Sikar (Rajasthan) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. M.S. Raghav HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 11/07/2025 Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are not an encroacher over the Government land rather then, petitioner No.1 has possession in the land in question as land was gifted to his mother by one Ganpat S/o Kalu Meena through a gift deed dated 10.09.2005 whereas petitioner No.2 has possession in the land in question under the Patta issued by the Gram Panchayat Dhod, District Sikar (Rajasthan) on 20.04.1995 in his favour. Counsel submits that petitioners are in lawful possession and notice dated 03.06.2024 issued under Section 91 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 for removal of the possession from the land in question, is illegal. It is submitted that under the garb of inquiry initiated under Section 91 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, rights of the petitioners cannot be curtailed and their residential house constructed on allotted land cannot be demolished. Counsel submits that reply/representation along with [2025:RJ-JP:25638] (2 of 2) [CW-10199/2025] relevant documents has already been submitted before the concerned authority but till date no decision has been taken on the reply/representation filed by the petitioners. In view of above submissions, I deem it just and proper to dispose of this petition with the direction to the concerned authority to consider the reply/representation of the petitioners within a period of ten weeks from today in accordance with law. Needless to say that concerned authority shall pass a reasoned order after considering the averments made in the reply/representation and giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, if till date no decision has been taken on the reply/representation filed by the petitioners. Till decision of the reply/representation filed by the petitioners, parties are directed to maintain status quo with regard to land in question. In case the representation filed by the petitioners is rejected by the respondents, the alleged encroachment may not be removed/dismantled for first four weeks so that during this period, he may avail suitable legal remedy in accordance with law. With the aforesaid directions, this civil writ petition is disposed of. Stay application as well as pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of. This Court has not passed any observation on the merits of the case and thus, the reply/representation filed by the petitioner, may be decided in accordance with law without being influenced or prejudiced by this order. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J LALIT MOHAN /38