[2026:RJ-JP:10903] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 604/2022 Jaan Mohammad Son Of Shri Hamida, Aged About 44 Years, Resident Of Near Eidgah, Patan Khurdh, Tehsil Tizara, Now Tapukda, District Alwar, Rajasthan. ----Appellant Versus 1. Prashant Karnawat Son Of Shri Santosh Chand Karnawat, Resident Of 19-Ka-04, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur, Through Power Of Attorney Holder Shri Sheeshram Son Of Shri Surajmal, Resident Of Village Milakpur, Post Office Khijooriwas, Tehsil Tizara, Now Tapukda, District Alwar, Rajasthan. 2. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Mines And Minerals, Secretariat, Jaipur. 3. The Joint Secretary, Mines And Minerals Department, Secretariat, Jaipur. 4. The Minerals Engineer, Minerals Department, State of Rajasthan, Alwar. ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Rahul Tiwari For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rahul Lodha HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA Order 16/03/2026 1. The present civil first appeal has been filed by the appellant - Jaan Mohammad, assailing the impugned judgment and decree dated 12.03.2020 passed by the learned Additional District Judge No. 2, Tijara, District Alwar (Rajasthan), in Civil Suit No. 34/27/2019, titled as "Prashant Karnawat Vs. State of Rajasthan [2026:RJ-JP:10903] (2 of 3) [CFA-604/2022] & Ors.", whereby the suit instituted by the plaintiff/respondent for declaration and permanent injunction, has been decreed. 2. Vide order dated 28.03.2024 passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, the appellant's application seeking leave to file the present appeal was allowed. The appellant was permitted to challenge the judgment and decree dated 22.03.2023, and the delay in filing the present appeal was condoned. 3. During the pendency of the present appeal, learned counsel for respondent No.2 sought time to ascertain the current status of the subject matter. 4. Today, the learned counsel for the respondent has submitted a factual report dated 14.03.2026 along with the Map Mauka Report, wherein Para Nos. 3 and 4 read as under: ^^ 3- [kf.Mr [kuu iV~Vk {ks= ls fu;ekuqlkj 45 ehVj ls ckgj] 50 ehVj dh U;wure nwjh ij ikVu[kqnZ xkWo dh vcknh vofLFkr gSA 4- ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; esa nk;j flfoy ;kfpdk la[;k 202@1995 Vh-,u- xksnkoeZu cuke ;wfu;u la?k ds vUrxZr nk;j flfoy ;kfpdk la[;k 4677@1985 ,e-lh- esgrk cuke la?k esa ikfjr vkns'k fnukad 09-05-2024 esa fn, x;s funsZ'kkuqlkj mDr {ks= ,Q-,l-vkbZ- fjiksVZ fnukad 25-08-2010 esa ifjHkkf"kr vjkoyh fgy@jsat ds vUrxZr vkrk gS] ftlesa ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; ls [kuu dk;Z dh vuqefr yh tkus dh ck/;rk dh xbZ gSA ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; ds lqvks eksVks fjV fiVh'ku 10@2025 esa ikfjr vkns'k fnukad 29-12-2025 ls ifjHkkf"kr vjkoyh fgy@jsat ds laca/k esa ikfjr vkns'k fnukad 20-11-2025 dks LFkfxr fd;k x;k gSA izdj.k esa xr lquokbZ fnukad 12-03-2026 fu;r Fkh] izdj.k ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; esa fopkjk/khu gSA ** 5. Learned counsel for respondent No. 2 submits that, in view of the above factual report dated 14.03.2026, the relief sought by the appellant has rendered infructuous. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant could not refute the aforesaid submission of learned counsel for the respondent No.2. [2026:RJ-JP:10903] (3 of 3) [CFA-604/2022] 7. In view of the above, the present civil first appeal is dismissed as having been rendered infructuous. 8. The stay application, and other pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. 9. However, the plaintiff/respondent shall be at liberty to assail the averments and veracity of the said factual report dated 14.03.2026 in accordance with law. (MANEESH SHARMA),J Seema/7