[2025:RJ-JP:35013-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 600/2025 Additional Chief Engineer, Public Health Engineering Department, Region-Ii, Gandhi Nagar, Jaipur. ----Appellant Versus 1. Bhagirath S/o Late Shri Lala, Resident Of Kirti Sagar, G- Block, Mangyawas, Mansarovar, Jaipur. 2. Shankar Lal S/o Shri Lal, Resident Of Kirti Sagar, G-Block, Mangyawas, Mansarovar, Jaipur. 3. Mangi Lal S/o Late Shri Lala, Resident Of Kirti Sagar, G- Block, Mangyawas, Mansarovar, Jaipur. 4. Om Prakash S/o Late Shri Lala, Resident Of Kirti Sagar, G-Block, Mangyawas, Mansarovar, Jaipur. 5. Devanand S/o Late Shri Lala, Resident Of Kirti Sagar, G- Block, Mangyawas, Mansarovar, Jaipur. 6. Nanag Ram S/o Late Shri Mangla, Resident Of Kirti Sagar, G-Block, Mangyawas, Mansarovar, Jaipur. 7. Sukkha S/o Late Shri Bheru, Resident Of Kirti Sagar, G- Block, Mangyawas, Mansarovar, Jaipur. 8. Jaipur Development Authority, Through Secretary, Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, Jaipur. 9. Deputy Commissioner, Zone-12, Jaipur Development Authority, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Ms. Mahi Yadav, AAG with Mr. Aaditya Godara, AAAG For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mahendra Kumar, Adv. Mr. Amit Kuri, Adv. with Mr. Dhanna Ram, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEET PUROHIT Order 01/09/2025 [2025:RJ-JP:35013-DB] (2 of 3) [SAW-600/2025] 1. The Deputy Commissioner, Zone-PRN (South-First) Jaipur Development Authority (for short 'J.D.A.'), Jaipur, shall file an affidavit with regard to the appeal filed before the Rajasthan Appellate Authority, Jaipur District, Jaipur titled as Jaipur Development Authority Vs. Mangla & Ors., stated to be against the judgment & decree dated 29.06.2022. 2. Let an affidavit of the Commissioner, J.D.A., Jaipur, also be filed reflecting whether an appeal was preferred. 3. It is stated by learned counsel appearing for the appellant- PHED that the land was handed-over to the PHED and they have already constructed a water tank. However, the water tank is not being made operative on account of the interim order passed by the J.D.A. The interim stay was granted by the High Court, which has been vacated and the writ petition is not being heard in spite of several early hearing applications moved in the matter. Learned counsel further submits that so far as the respondents are concerned, the persons in whose favour an award has been passed under the Land Acquisition Act, the compensation aspect is the only issue which needs to be determined. Learned counsel also submits that after the land has been acquired, the order passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer (S.D.O) to enter the name of the respondents and directions to Tehsildar, Sanganer to record Khasra No.123 measuring 0.29 Hectare in the name of the respondents, was wholly uncalled for. 4. We do not require to examine these aforesaid aspects while deciding the present appeal and the order challenged before us, is only the order by which the interim stay was vacated. [2025:RJ-JP:35013-DB] (3 of 3) [SAW-600/2025] 5. Considering the aforesaid facts & circumstances, we direct both the parties to maintain status quo over the land in question, which also includes restraining of parties from making any further construction over there. However, if the water tank has already been constructed, the same shall be made operative which will be, of course, subject to the final decision of the pending writ petition. All the parties shall present themselves before the learned Single Judge and we request learned Single Judge to take up the said matter at the earliest. 6. Keeping in view the public cause involved in the matter, let the matter be listed before the learned Single Judge on 15.09.2025, whereafter learned Single Judge shall pass an appropriate order. 7. The aforesaid affidavits, as directed by us, shall be filed before learned Single Judge. 8. The instant special appeal writ stands disposed of. 9. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (SANJEET PUROHIT),J (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J AVINASH GULERIA /49