Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 32356 (RAJ)

HABIB S/O SHAFI KHAN v. CHANDER SINGH

CW/18720/2024 · 2025-05-12

Anoop Kumar Dhand

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18720/2024 Habib S/o Shafi Khan, Aged About 65 Years, R/o Near Jama Masjid, Ramsar, Tehsil Nasirabad, District Ajmer. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Chander Singh, S/o Ram Singh 2. Madan Lal S/o Mohan Lal, Through Legal Heirs 3. Smt. Badam Devi, W/o Madan Lal 4. Narendra Kumar S/o Madan Lal, R/o Bijaynagar, District Ajmer. 5. Uttamchand S/o Madan Lal, R/o Bhilwara. 6. Suresh S/o Madan Lal, S/o Shastri Nagar, Bhilwara. 7. Smt. Kanta Devi D/o Late Shri Madan Lal, R/o Village Ramsar, Tehsil Nasirabad, District Ajmer 8. Raju Singh @ Balbir Singh S/o Milap Chand, Resident Of Ramsar, Tehsil Nasirabad, District Ajmer. 9. Sajjan Singh S/o Milap Chand, Resident Of Ramsar, Tehsil Nasirabad, District Ajmer. 10. Smt. Kanchan Devi W/o Sampatlal, Resident Of Ramsar, Tehsil Nasirabad, District Ajmer. 11. Gopal Singh S/o Sampatlal, Resident Of Ramsar, Tehsil Nasirabad, District Ajmer. 12. Rakesh Kumar S/o Sampatlal, Resident Of Ramsar, Tehsil Nasirabad, District Ajmer. 13. Sunil Kumar S/o Sampatlal, Resident Of Ramsar, Tehsil Nasirabad, District Ajmer. 14. Smt. Shakuntala D/o Sampatlal, Resident Of Ramsar, Tehsil Nasirabad, District Ajmer. 15. Smt. Sushila D/o Sampatlal, Resident Of Ramsar, Tehsil Nasirabad, District Ajmer. 16. Smt. Beena D/o Sampatlal, Resident Of Ramsar, Tehsil Nasirabad, District Ajmer. 17. Smt. Anila Devi D/o Sampatlal, Resident Of Ramsar, Tehsil Nasirabad, District Ajmer. 18. Smt. Vimla Devi W/o Bhanwar Singh, Resident Of Ramsar, (2 of 3) [CW-18720/2024] Tehsil Nasirabad, District Ajmer. 19. Anil Kumar S/o Bhanwar Singh, Resident Of Ramsar, Tehsil Nasirabad, District Ajmer. 20. Sunil Kumar S/o Bhanwar Singh, Resident Of Ramsar, Tehsil Nasirabad, District Ajmer. 21. State Of Rajasthan, Through Tehsildar, Nasirabad District Ajmer. 22. Chatar Singh S/o Sardar Singh, R/o Village Rampura, Tehsil Nasirabad District Ajmer. 23. Ramswaroop Choudhary S/o Gajju, R/o Village Mavashiya, Tehsil Nasirabad District Ajmer. 24. Manikant Sharma S/o Durga Sahai Gangawat, R/o House No. 2622. Pop Singh Mohalla, Nasirabad, District Ajmer. 25. Harikishan S/o Ramesh Chand Maheshwari, R/o Village Ramsar, Tehsil Nasirabad, District Ajmer. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vikas Saini For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singhal with Mr. Firoz Akhtar JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 12/05/2025 1 By way of filing this writ petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned order dated 29.07.2024 passed by the Board of Revenue (for short, ‘the Board’) by which the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the impugned judgment and decree dated 06.02.2009 passed by the Revenue Appellate Authority has been rejected. 2. At the outset, counsel for the respondents has apprised this Court that against the same impugned order dated 29.07.2024 passed by the Board, the petitioner has submitted a review (3 of 3) [CW-18720/2024] petition under Section 229 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 (for short, ‘the Act of 1955’) and the said review petition is still pending before the Board. Counsel submits that the petitioner cannot avail two parallel remedy against the same impugned order, hence this writ petition is liable to be rejected on this count alone. 3. Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on record. 4. Considering the arguments raised by counsel for the respondents and looking to the fact that the very same impugned order dated 29.07.2024 is under review before the Board and the review petition was submitted by no one else but the petitioner himself, thus, this Court cannot allow him to avail two parallel remedy simultaneously, hence, this petition is not maintainable and the same is rejected on this count alone. 5. The present writ petition stands dismissed, accordingly. 6. However, the petitioner may pursue the said remedy before the Board and the Board is directed to decide the same strictly in accordance with law. 7. Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand dismissed. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Ashu/5