HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 106/2024 1. Shri Ganpat Lal S/o Dalchand Regar, Aged About 46 Years, R/o Kareda District Bhilwara (Raj.). 2. Shri Krishna Gopal S/o Shri Ganpat Lal Sharma, Aged About 49 Years, R/o Kareda District Bhilwara (Raj.). 3. Shri Shankar S/o Shri Jagdish Chandra Acharya, Aged About 48 Years, R/o Kareda District Bhilwara (Raj.). ----Petitioners Versus 1. Lrs. Of Roshan Lal, S/o Shri Mangi Lal Ji Tak, Through. 2. Kanku Devi W/o Shri Roshan Lal Tak, Aged About 62 Years, Resident Of Kareda District Bhilwara. 3. Shiv S/o Shri Roshan Lal Tak, Aged About 44 Years, Resident Of Kareda District Bhilwara. 4. Shyam S/o Shri Roshan Lal Tak, Aged About 41 Years, Resident Of Kareda District Bhilwara. 5. Ashok S/o Shri Roshan Lal Tak, Aged About 38 Years, Resident Of Kareda District Bhilwara. 6. Manoj S/o Shri Roshan Lal Tak, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Kareda, District Bhilwara. 7. Shantilal S/o Shri Mangilal, Aged About 56 Years, R/o Kareda, District Bhilwara. 8. Mohannath S/o Hazari Nath, R/o Kareda, District Bhilwara. 9. Smt. Ugami W/o Late Shri Ladunath, R/o Kareda, District Bhilwara (Raj.). 10. Kishanath S/o Shri Ladunath, R/o Kareda, District Bhilwara (Raj.). 11. Smt. Pushpa D/o Shri Ladunath, R/o Kareda, District Bhilwara (Raj.). 12. Smt. Kanta W/o Shri Hardev Nath, R/o Bagore, Tehsil.- Mandal Distt. Bhilwara (Raj.). 13. Lrs. Of Smt. Kanchan W/o Shri Sohannath, Aged About 46 Years, R/o Jojawar, Marwar Junction, District Pali. 14. Shri Sohannath, R/o Jojawar, District Pali. (2 of 2) [WRW-106/2024] 15. Shri Mukesh Nath S/o Shri Sohan Nath, R/o Jojawar, Tehsil- Jojawar, District Pali. 16. Shri Bheru Nath S/o Shri Sohan Nath, R/o Jojawar, Tehsil- Jojawar, District Pali. 17. Ms. Reenanath S/o Shri Sohannath, R/o Jojawar, Tehsil- Jojawar, District Pali. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. R.S. Mankad. For Respondent(s) : --- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA Order (Oral) 20/01/2025 No grounds to review the well reasoned order dated 07.11.2023 as the material placed on record is not worthy enough so as to warrant recalling of the order under review. The review petition is, therefore, dismissed. (ARUN MONGA),J 125-SKM/Mohan