HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 39/2023 In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.17572/2012 Khadi Gramodhay Samittee, Dholpur Through Its Assistant / Deputy Secretary Mr. Anang Pal Singh S/o Shri Rambabu Singh, At Present Mr. Rajpal Singh Sisodiya Son Of Late Shri Rambabu Singh, Aged About 40 Years, R/o G.t. Road, Dholpur (Rajasthan) ----Petitioner Versus 1. National Highway Authority, Through Its Project Director, Operation Unit-13, Vivekanand Marg, University Road, Gwalior (M.p.) 2. The Competent Authority (Land Acquisition Officer- Cum-Additional District Collector), Dholpur (Rajasthan). 3. The District Collector, Dholpur, District Dholpur (Rajasthan). ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dinesh Kumar Garg For Respondent(s) : Ms. Gunjan Chawla and Ms. Poonam Rao for Mr. Neeraj Batra, GC JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 30/07/2025 1. By way of filing this review petition, a prayer has been made to recall the order dated 15.11.2017 passed by this Court while deciding S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.17572/2012. 2. Learned counsel for the review petitioner submits that against the order dated 21.08.2012 passed by the District (2 of 3) [WRW-39/2023] Collector, the petitioner approached this Court by way of filing S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.17572/2012. Counsel submits that the controversy involved in the petition submitted by the petitioner was covered by the judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court passed in the case of Madhavi Sharma vs. National Highways Authority and Ors. reported in 2016 (3) RLW (Raj.) 1879, but this fact was not brought into notice of the Co-ordinate Bench and the writ petition was dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy. Counsel submits that aggrieved by the aforesaid, a special appeal was preferred before the Division Bench of this Court and the Division Bench vide its order dated 02.02.2023 granted liberty to the petitioner to file a review petition in the light of the judgment passed in the case of Madhavi Sharma (supra). Counsel submits that the matter is required to be adjudicated on its merits by this Court in the light of the judgment passed in the case of Madhavi Sharma (supra). 3. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents opposes the arguments raised by counsel for the petitioner, but she is not in a position to controvert the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. 4. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on record. 5. Considering the arguments put forward by learned counsel for the review petitioner and the ground narrated in the review petition, the order dated 15.11.2017 is recalled. (3 of 3) [WRW-39/2023] 6. Accordingly, the instant review petition stands allowed. The S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.17572/2012 is restored to its original number. 7. Office to proceed. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J KuD/102