[2025:RJ-JP:28400] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.16107/2018 1. Jawahar Singh Son Of Girand Singh, Aged About 88 Years, Resident Of Sundadrpura, Tehsil And District Dholpur (Rajasthan) 2. Chhitariya Son Of Jandel Singh, Aged About 40 Years, Resident Of Sundadrpura, Tehsil And District Dholpur (Rajasthan) 3. Jagveer Son Of Jandel Singh, Aged About 38 Years, Resident Of Sundadrpura, Tehsil And District Dholpur (Rajasthan) 4. Shyama Daughter Of Jandel Singh, Aged About 50 Years, Resident Of Sundadrpura, Tehsil And District Dholpur (Rajasthan) 5. Rajjo Daughter Of Jandel Singh, Aged About 45 Years, Resident Of Sundadrpura, Tehsil And District Dholpur (Rajasthan) ----Petitioners Versus 1. Laxman Singh Son Of Chhatu, Resident Of Village Kasimpur, Tehsil And District Dholpur (Rajasthan) 2. The Tehsildar, Tehsil Dholpur District Dholpur (Rajasthan) ----Respondents Connected With S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2051/2024 1. Jawahar Singh S/o Girand Singh, Aged About 92 Years, 2. Chhitariya S/o Jandel Singh, Aged About 44 Years, 3. Jagveer S/o Jandel Singh, Aged About 42 Years, 4. Shyama D/o Jandel Singh, Aged About 54 Years, 5. Rajjo D/o Jandel Singh, Aged About 49 Years, All resident of Sundarpura, Tehsil and District Dholpur (Rajasthan). ----Petitioners Versus 1. Laxman Singh S/o Chhattu, Resident Of Village Kasimpur, Tehsil and District Dholpur. 2. The Tehsildar, Tehsil Dholpur, District Dholpur (Rajasthan) ----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2021/2024 1. Jawahar Singh Son Of Girand Singh, Aged About 92 Years, 2. Chhitariya Son Of Jandel Singh, Aged About 44 Years, 3. Jagveer Son Of Jandel Singh, Aged About 42 Years, 4. Shyama Daughter Of Jandel Singh, Aged About 54 Years, [2025:RJ-JP:28400] (2 of 3) [CW-16107/2018] 5. Rajjo Daughter Of Jandel Singh, Aged About 49 Years, All resident Of Sundarpura, Tehsil and District Dholpur (Rajasthan.) ----Petitioners Versus 1. Laxman Singh Son Of Chhattu, Resident Of Village Kasimpur, Tehsil and District Dholpur 2. The Tehsildar, Tehsil Dholpur, District Dholpur (Rajasthan) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Dinesh Kumar Garg, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr.Neeraj Batra, Government Advocate with Ms.Gunjan Chawla, Adv. Mr.N.L. Verma, Adv. with Mr.Mahendra Choudhary, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN Order 28/07/2025 1. These three writ petitions arise from a litigation involving the land bearing khasra no.479/1 situated at Village Sundarpur, Tehsil and District Dholpur. 2. The dispute resulted in multiple proceedings including a suit for declaration filed before the Sub-Divisional Officer, Dholpur which is pending till date. A reference made by the Tehsildar for cancellation of the allotment in favour of the respondents was dismissed by the Board of Revenue. 3. The writ petition No.16107/2018 was filed with a prayer that the proceedings under Section 183-B of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 (for short ‘the Act’) be stayed and the application filed under Section 10 of CPC be allowed. 4. The writ petition No.2021/2024 was filed aggrieved of dismissal of application under Rule 14(4) of the Rajasthan Land [2025:RJ-JP:28400] (3 of 3) [CW-16107/2018] Revenue (Allotment of Land for Agriculture Purposes) Rules, 1970 (hereinafter ‘the Rules’). 5. The writ petition No.2051/2024 was filed aggrieved of dismissal of application for interim injunction. 6. During pendency of the writ petition (16107/2018), this Court vide order dated 01.08.2018 stayed the proceedings under Section 183-B of the Act. 7. Considering that basic foundation of this entire litigation is a subject matter of revenue suit pending before the SDO Court, these writ petitions are disposed of with direction that the revenue suit be decided within six months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. However, till decision of the revenue suit, the interim order dated 01.08.2018 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.16107/2018 shall continue. 8. It is made clear that the revenue court shall not grant any unwarranted adjournments to either of the party. Needless to say that the parties shall be at liberty to avail remedies in accordance with law if aggrieved of the outcome of the revenue suit. (AVNEESH JHINGAN), J Himanshu Soni/40-42