[2025:RJ-JP:9141] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2507/2025 1. Kailash Chand S/o Shri Lallu Ram, Aged About 55 Years, R/o Village Benard Meh Daulatpura, Tehsil- Rampura Dabari, District- Jaipur, Rajasthan 2. Mahesh Kumar S/o Shri Lallu Ram, Aged About 48 Years, R/o Village Benard Meh Daulatpura, Tehsil- Rampura Dabari, District- Jaipur, Rajasthan ----Petitioners Versus Jaipur Development Authority, Through Secretary Office At Indra Circle, Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, Jaipur ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anish Bhadala For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL Order 03/03/2025 1. Petitioner has filed instant writ petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India, impugning the interim stay order dated 16.01.2025 passed by the Appellate Tribunal, JDA, Jaipur in the appeal filed by the petitioner against the notice dated 10.01.2025 issued by the JDA under Section 72 of the JDA, Act, 1982 to remove encroachment of petitioner over the land of JDA bearing Khasra No.389 from area 5.82 meter x 83.5 meter to the extent of not granting interim stay in respect of land of Khasra No.389. 2. Heard counsel for the petitioner and persued the material available on record. 3. It is an admitted case of petitioner that petitioner himself has filed an application under Section 136 of the Rajasthan Land [2025:RJ-JP:9141] (2 of 3) [CW-2507/2025] Revenue Act,1956 before the Sub-Divisional Officer, seeking to correct the site map in respect of Khasra No.369/1 and claims the land of Khasra No.369/1 to be of his Khatedari and possession. Tribunal has already granted interim stay order in favour of petitioner, restraining the JDA not to dispossess the petitioner from the land of Khasra No.369/1. However, interim stay for seeking protection of his encroachment/ possession over the land of Khasra No.389, which is indisputably recorded in the name of JDA, has not been granted. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the lands of Khasra No.389 and 369/1 are adjoining, hence unless and until the boundaries of Khasra No.369/1 is not determined and corrected in the proceedings under Section 136 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act,1956, petitioners may not be held responsible for making encroachment over the land of Khasra No.389, hence an interim stay be granted in their favour. 5. This Court finds that indisputably petitioners are not claiming their property rights over the land of Khasra No.389, which belongs to JDA. Mere pendency of application filed by the petitioners under Section 136 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956, raising an issue to correct the boundaries of Khasra No.369/1, may not put the petitioners on an advantageous position to continue their encroachment/ possession over the land of Khasra No.389. Thus, the petitioners could not establish any prima facie case to seek interim stay order for protection of their possession over the land of Khasra No.389. As far as their possession over the land of Khasra No.369/1 is concerned, [2025:RJ-JP:9141] (3 of 3) [CW-2507/2025] Tribunal has already granted interim stay order, in favour of petitioners. 6. The impugned order is interlocutory in nature and stay application is yet to be decided finally on merits, hence at the stage of passing ad interim stay order, no interference is warranted by this Court in exercise of its power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. However, it is made clear that any of the observation made hereinabove by this Court shall not come in way of petitioners, to decide the appeal or stay application pending before the Appellate Tribunal, JDA. 7. With aforesaid observations, but without interference to the impugned order, the instant writ petition is hereby dismissed. 8. Stay application and any other pending application, if any, stand disposed of. (SUDESH BANSAL),J TN/13