IN Rajendra Kumar Virani v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.

11th March, 2008. JUDGMENT

This misc. application has been filed by the petitioner for recalling of the order dated 6.1.2003 whereby the writ petition No.1239/2001 – Rajendra Kumar V/s State of Rajasthan and ors.. was decided by this Court with a request to the Revenue Authority, i.e. The Dist. Collector to decide the application filed by the present SBCMISC.APPLICATION NO.51/2004– RAJENDRA KUMAR VIRANI V/S STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS. : ORDER DTD.11.3.2008 petitioner for determination of compensation payable by the petitioner as he was given a mining lease over the land which belonged to Devasthan Department/Forest Department under Section 89 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act expeditiously.

The learned counsel for the petitioner – applicant submits that since in the present case, no application under Section 89 was filed, such direction is not in accordance with the pleadings of the petitioner.

Section 89(4) of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 stipulates that the State Government or its assignee like the petitioner in the present case shall pay to such persons the compensation for such infringement and the amount of such compensation shall be calculated by the Collector, or , if his award is not accepted, by the civil court, as nearly as may be, in accordance with the provisions of the Rajasthan Land Acquisition Act, 1953. Section 89 deals with right to minerals, mines and quarries which vest in the State Government and which are assigned by the State Government to other private parties like present petitioner. If rights of other persons are affected, SBCMISC.APPLICATION NO.51/2004– RAJENDRA KUMAR VIRANI V/S STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS. : ORDER DTD.11.3.2008 the State Government or its assignee like present petitioner are expected to pay compensation as may be determined by the Collector under Section 89(4) of the Act.

Merely because in the present case, the petitioner did not file any application under Section 89 of the Act, it does not set apart this case from connected writ petition, namely SBCWP No.1238/2001 filed by the same petitioner for adjacent land which was claimed by the Devasthan Department to be of its own, wherein the Court directed the Collector to decide the amount of compensation in terms of Section 89(4) of the Act. In the present case, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Forest Department was claiming its right over the land in question as well as Devasthan Department. Be that as it may, the amount of compensation as well as rival claims of Devasthan Department and Forest Department can be decided by the concerned Collector in terms of Section 89(4) of the Act. Therefore, the direction given while deciding the aforesaid writ petition No.1239/2001 on 6.1.2003 directing the Revenue Authority, i.e. the Dist. Collector to decide such application, is not required to be recalled. It is only expected of the said Collector, while deciding the SBCMISC.APPLICATION NO.51/2004– RAJENDRA KUMAR VIRANI V/S STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS. : ORDER DTD.11.3.2008 application under Section 89(4) of the Act, to further decide such rival claims of the two Departments in question also on the basis of Revenue Record.

With these observations, this misc. application also stands disposed of. No order as to costs. Item No.2 Ss/- (Dr.VINEET KOTHARI)J.