[2025:RJ-JP:3571] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18857/2024 Chanda Devi W/o Prabhu Dayal Jat, Aged About 58 Years, R/o Village Joshibas, Tehsil Jobner, District Jaipur. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through District Collector, Jaipur. 2. Chairman, Gramdani Village Joshibas, Tehsil Jobner District Jaipur. 3. Superintendent Of Police, District Jaipur Rural, Jaipur. 4. Station House Officer, Police Station Jobner, District Jaipur Rural, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mahesh Kalwania For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL Order 24/01/2025 This writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondents to stop the illegal construction being raised in the petitioner’s khatedari land, to take effective action against the persons raising construction, restrain them from creating any obstruction in using of her khatedari land, to lodge an FIR against the persons who prepared forged agreement of the khatedari land. The relevant facts in brief, as borne out from the memo of writ petition, are that the Village Joshibas is a Gramdani Village and the petitioner is a co-sharer in the land of khasra No.61/2 min and 71/1 of this village. It is averred that some persons prepared a forged sale agreement dated 15.12.2023 of her share in the [2025:RJ-JP:3571] (2 of 4) [CW-18857/2024] subject agricultural land in the name of ‘Shanti Grah Nirman Sahkari Samiti Limited’ on basis whereof, the Samiti issued allotment letter in favour of some persons on 01.01.1990, i.e., prior to execution of the agreement establishing that not only the sale agreement but, the allotment letter is also forged. It is alleged that on the basis of such forged allotment letter, some persons started construction in her khatedari land whereas, she has never sold it to any person. It is further averred that she submitted a complaint to the Police Station Jobner on 23.07.2024 for taking legal action against the miscreants but, no action was taken. It is stated that the Chairman, Gramdani Village has sent a notice on 25.08.2024 to the petitioner to stop the illegal construction in her khatedari land without taking any action against the persons who, as a matter of fact, are raising construction. Learned counsel for the petitioner, reiterating the averments made in the writ petition, submits that she had never executed any sale agreement and it is a forged document. He submits that despite making a complaint to the Police as also to the Chairman, Gramsabha Gramdani Joshibas, they are not taking any action against the persons raising construction on her khatedari land in the garb of the forged agreement dated 04.01.2013; rather, she has been served upon with a notice dated 25.08.2024 to stop construction in her khatedari land. Referring to and relying upon the provisions of Section 46 of the Rajasthan Gram Dan Act, 1971 (for brevity, “the Act of 1971”), learned counsel submits that since the jurisdiction of the Civil and Revenue Court is barred in respect of the subject matter of the writ petition, only this Court can [2025:RJ-JP:3571] (3 of 4) [CW-18857/2024] interfere in its writ jurisdiction. He, therefore, prays that the writ petition be allowed and the relief prayed for be granted. Heard. Considered. As is apparent from the averments in the writ petition, it involves a lot of disputed question of facts. In its writ jurisdiction, this Court is not expected to record a finding of fact that the subject sale agreement dated 04.01.2013 is forged one or not and whether based thereupon, the society has issued the subject allotment letter (Annexure-4) dated 01.01.1990. Further, it is not established that any illegal construction is being raised on the khatedari land of the petitioner and if yes, by whom? Moreover, a prayer has been made in the writ petition to take effective steps against the persons raising construction and restrain them from creating any obstruction in petitioner’s right to use her khatedari land; but, neither such persons are specified in the memo of writ petition nor, they have been impleaded as party respondents in absence whereof, the relief prayed for cannot be granted. Although, in the writ petition, it is stated that agreement has been forged in favour of Shanti Grah Nirman Sahkari Samiti Limited but, a perusal of the sale agreement placed on record as Annexure-3 reveals Shri Suraj Yadav as its purchaser and not the society as claimed. Further, the allotment letter (Annexure-4) neither reveals that it pertains to the subject khatedari land nor, that it has been issued by Shri Suraj Yadav, the purchaser in the sale agreement. Therefore, the averments in the writ petition are contrary to the documents appended therewith. In so far as contention qua notice dated 25.08.2024 Annexure-8 is concerned, suffice it to say that it is alleged therein [2025:RJ-JP:3571] (4 of 4) [CW-18857/2024] that the petitioner is raising construction on the charagah land. It does not allege any illegal construction in the khatedari land of the petitioner either by herself or by some third person. Submission of the learned counsel of the petitioner based on Section 46 of the Act of 1971 so as to impregnate this Court to interfere in the matter in its writ jurisdiction, is wholly misconceived and misplaced. Learned counsel for the petitioner has miserably failed to satisfy this Court that she does not have remedy before the Civil/Revenue Court for redressal of her grievance(s). Resultanly, this writ petition is dismissed being misconceived and devoid of merit. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of accordingly. (MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J GAURAV/31