[2025:RJ-JP:8250] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1436/2008 1. Smt Sanjana Devi And Wife of Shri Mala Ram. 2. Smt. Tophali Devi Wife of Shri Prabhata Ram. Both Resident of Bujiwala Tan Dipawas, Tehsil Neem Ka Thana, District Sikar. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Board of Revenue, Rajasthan, Ajmer. 2. Revenue Appellate Authority, Sikar, District Sikar. 3. Sub- Divisional Officer, Neem Ka Thana, District Sikar. 4. Smt. Ghisi Devi Wife of Shri Mala Ram, Resident of Dhani Bujiwala Tan Dipawas, Tehsil Neem Ka Thana, District Sikar. 5. Mangi Lal, 6. Gopi Ram, 7. Kailash All sons of Shri Murlidhar, Resident of Village Bujiwala Tan Dipawan Tehsil Neem Ka Thana, District Sikar. 8. State of Rajasthan through Tehsildar, Neem Ka Thana, District Sikar. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Utkarsh Goyal, Mr. Rahul Sharma for Mr. S.K. Gupta, Sr. Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Gaurav Gupta for Mr. Harsh Saini for NP No.4 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL Order 24/02/2025 1. Though the matter was listed in the "Orders" category for want of service upon respondent No.5, however, since on behalf of contesting respondent No.4, counsel has put in appearance and the issue involved is in respect of quashing of interim stay order [2025:RJ-JP:8250] (2 of 3) [CW-1436/2008] passed by the Board of Revenue vide order impugned dated 17.03.2007, with the consent of counsel for both parties, the writ petition has been heard finally on merits at this stage. 2. Instant writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, was filed by petitioner way back on 02.02.2008, impugning the order dated 17.03.2007 passed by the Board of Revenue in revision petition filed under Section 230 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 (for short "the Act of 1955"), whereby and whereunder the Board of Revenue set aside the interim stay order dated 20.09.2006 passed by the Revenue Appellate Authority, Sikar and leaving it open to decide the appeal by the Revenue Appellate Authority against the order dated 08.09.2006 passed by the Sub- Divisional Officer, Neem Ka Thana, dismissing application filed by petitioners under Section 212 of the Act of 1955. 3. Having heard counsel for both parties and from perusal of record, it appears that an application for temporary injunction, filed by petitioners under Section 212 of the Act of 1955, was dismissed on merits by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Neem Ka Thana, vide order dated 08.09.2006, with an observation that both parties are Co-Khatedars of the disputed land and temporary injunction should not be granted against Co-Khatedars. 4. It appears that against the order dated 08.09.2006, petitioners preferred an appeal before the Revenue Appellate Authority. The Revenue Appellate Authority, vide interim order dated 20.09.2006, directed parties to maintain status quo and kept the appeal pending. Thereagainst, respondent No.4 preferred a revision petition under Section 230 of the Act of 1955 before the Board of Revenue. The Board of Revenue, in exercise of its powers [2025:RJ-JP:8250] (3 of 3) [CW-1436/2008] under Section 230 of the Act of 1955, vide order dated 17.03.2007, granted indulgence and set aside the interim stay order dated 20.09.2006 passed by the Revenue Appellate Authority with clear observation that no such interim stay order could have been passed in respect of land in question, disputed between Co-Khatedars. 5. The Board of Revenue has assigned reasons to exercise its jurisdiction to set aside the interim stay order dated 20.09.2006 and this Court does not find any jurisdictional error or perversity in the order impugned, warranting interference by this Court in exercise of powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. However, it is hereby observed that in case the appeal, filed by petitioners against the order dated 08.09.2006, is still pending before the Revenue Appellate Authority, it is expected that same shall be considered and decided expeditiously and further, it is also observed that the denial of interim stay on petitioners' application for temporary injunction, shall not affect their main case. 6. With the aforesaid observation, but without interfering with the impugned order dated 17.03.2007, the present writ petition is hereby disposed of. 7. Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of. (SUDESH BANSAL),J Sachin Sharma/27