[2025:RJ-JP:41948] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14560/2025 M/s Agarwal Builders And Colonizers, Through Partner Shri Kunj Bihari Gupta, Aged About 54 Years S/o Atmaram Gupta Partner Of M/s Agarwal Builders And Colonizers A Partnership Firm Having Its Registered Address At A-69 Opposite Karauli House, New Sanganer Road, Jaipur. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Local Self Government Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Jaipur Municipal Corporation (Heritage), Jaipur Through Deputy Commissioner (Land) Hawa Mahal Jaipur. ----Respondents Connected With S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12542/2025 M/s Agarwal Builders And Colonizers, Through Partner Shri Kunj Bihari Gupta, Aged About 54 Years S/o Atmaram Gupta Partner Of M/s Agarwal Builders And Colonizers At Partnership Firm Having Its Registered Address At A-69 Opposite Karauli House, Newsanganer Road, Jaipur ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Local Self Government Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Jaipur Municipal Corporation (Heritage), Jaipur Through Deputy Commissioner (Land) Hawa Mahal Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Abhinav Sharma, Adv with Mr. Akshay Varma, Adv. & Mr. Rahul Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. G.S. Gill, AAG with Mr. S.P. Singh Rajawat, Adv. Mr. Yadvendra Patel, Adv. Ms. Vandana Chauhan, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEET PUROHIT Order 14/10/2025 [2025:RJ-JP:41948] (2 of 4) [CW-14560/2025] 1. With the consent of counsels for both the parties, the matter is taken up for final arguments today. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that to challenge the Public Notice dated 07.08.2025, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12542/2025 has been preferred. It was mentioned in the public notice that some irregularities have been found with regard to grant of pattas including the petitioners and they have been called upon to submit objection/explanation within a period of seven days. 3. During the pendency of the said writ petition, the respondent No.2-Jaipur Municipal Corporation (Heritage), Jaipur, without considering the response/objection submitted by the petitioner and also without following the procedure provided under Section 73-B of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 2009 (for short ‘the Act of 2009’) has passed the order dated 13.09.2025 and thereby cancelled the Patta dated 24.02.2023 issued in favour of the petitioner. 4. Challenging the said order dated 13.09.2025 as published in the newspaper for cancellation of the patta, the S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.14560/2025 has been preferred. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the order so passed by the respondent No.2- Municipal Corporation is wholly without jurisdiction and relied upon the order dated 15.12.2023 passed by Division Bench of this Court at Principal Seat, Jodhpur in D.B. Special Appeal Writ No.897/2023 (Kan Singh and Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors.). Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the procedure as provided under Section 73-B of the Act of 2009 has also not been followed. [2025:RJ-JP:41948] (3 of 4) [CW-14560/2025] 6. Learned Additional Advocate General, Mr. G. S. Gill submitted that for challenging the order for cancellation of patta, clear statutory remedy is provided under Section 73-B (4) of the Act of 2009. It was also informed that as a matter of fact, the petitioner has already preferred the statutory appeal and therefore, no adjudication at this stage is warranted from this Court. 7. This Court is of the opinion that once the petitioner has already availed the statutory remedy and the same is pending consideration before the Appellate Authority, the parallel remedy by way of the present writ petition is not maintainable. The petitioner is free to pursue the aforesaid appeal and all the grounds raised in the present writ petition shall also be agitated before the Appellate Authority itself. 8. The Appellate Authority is directed to consider the same and pass an appropriate order within a period of three months from today in accordance with law. 9. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that without awaiting for the outcome of the said appeal, the respondents- Authorities are dispossessing the petitioner and in similar matters, the interim protection has been granted by this Hon’ble Court. 10. This Court is of the considered opinion that if the respondents are permitted to execute the order of cancellation of the patta without first deciding the appeal, the very purpose of incorporating the provisions providing for statutory appeal, would get frustrated. [2025:RJ-JP:41948] (4 of 4) [CW-14560/2025] 11. Therefore, the respondents are restrained from taking any coercive action against the petitioner till final adjudication of the appeal so preferred by the petitioner. 12. With these observations, the present writ petitions are disposed of accordingly. 13. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. (SANJEET PUROHIT),J AVINASH GULERIA /60-61