District Alwar (Rajasthan) v. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary

Judgment

1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

2. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Behror, District Alwar (Rajasthan)

3. The Tehsildar, Behror, District Alwar (Rajasthan). ----Respondents For Petitioner(s)

: Mr. Anil Mehta, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Ranvijay Singh For Respondent(s) : Mr. Prakash Jha for Mr. Ashvin Garg HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL Order 19/03/2025

1. Heard on the Civil Miscellaneous Application No.1/2024 filed by applicants – Subhash & Ors. so also on the writ petition filed by petitioner, on merits and carefully perused the record.

2. Instant writ petition is a classic example of misuse of jurisdiction of the High Court by the petitioner, which obviously has been filed by petitioner under some ill and tainted legal advise to get entry of mutation in her name and to obtain possession of the disputed lands, by seeking directions of the High Court, that too, behind the back of the applicants and other contesting parties as much as in supersession of the stay orders passed by the Civil [2025:RJ-JP:12612] (2 of 7) [CW-8175/2023] Courts in other civil litigations pending between the parties in respect of the same disputed lands.

3. The relevant factual matrix of the case, in nutshell, is that writ petitioner filed instant civil writ petition under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking issuance of direction by the High Court in her favour and against the respondents – state authorities to handover the possession of the disputed lands in furtherance to the order dated 11.10.2002 (Annexure-3) passed by Sub Divisional Officer, Behror, District Alwar, in Revenue Execution Case No.10/1999. It is noteworthy that writ petition has been preferred only by impleading the state authorities i.e. the concerned Sub Divisional Officer and the Tehsildar of Behror, District Alwar, as party respondents along with the State of Rajasthan and the contesting parties, who are parties in the execution case and in actual possession of the disputed lands, have not been impleaded as party respondents herein, which prima facie seems to be a deliberate and mischievous act on the part of the petitioner. It is further noteworthy that petitioner is well aware and knows very well that mutation and possession of the disputed lands is lying with the opposite party i.e. applicants herein and various kinds of civil and revenue litigations, in respect of disputed lands, are undergoing between the parties and pending before the Courts. Moreover, in a civil suit filed by one Ramswaroop, which is pending before the Court of Additional District & Sessions Judge No.2, Behror, a stay order of status-quo dated 07.09.2021 in respect of disputed lands has been passed, which is in effect and operation. In an another civil suit filed by Ramswaroop and others, [2025:RJ-JP:12612] (3 of 7) [CW-8175/2023] questioning the Will of the petitioner, a stay order dated

03.01.2023 to maintain the status-quo in respect of the lands in question passed by the Court of Civil Judge, Behror, is also effective and in operation, yet petitioner deliberately did not implead contesting parties as respondents in the present writ petition.

4. The writ petitioner, in this writ petition, has come up with a case that in respect of disputed lands, detailed out in the prayer clause, a revenue suit for declaration and possession was decreed in favour of Shri Badliya son of Shri Naniya and against Rambai, Bhoola, Prabhati, Shyonarayan and Surja vide judgment and decree dated 15.04.1963 passed by Sub Divisional Officer, Behror, District Alwar (Annexure-2). Decree-holder-Badliya happens to be father of the petitioner, who sought execution of the judgment and decree dated 15.04.1963, but Badliya died on 17.08.1989 and on the basis of his Will dated 21.06.1984, petitioner was substituted as his sole heir vide order dated 11.10.2002 in the execution proceedings and Tehsildar, Behror was directed to handover the possession of the disputed lands to the petitioner. It is worthy to note that in compliance of the order dated

11.10.2002, Tehsildar submitted report dated 08.11.2002 (Annexure-4) pointing out that the disputed lands are mortgaged with the Bank.

5. It is not in dispute that the disputed lands were mutated in the revenue record in the names of applicants and were in their actual and cultivatory possession against whom petitioner sought to execute the judgment and decree dated 15.04.1963 and wanted to obtain possession pursuant to the order dated [2025:RJ-JP:12612] (4 of 7) [CW-8175/2023]

11.10.2002 passed in Revenue Execution Case No.10/1999 titled as “Badliya Versus Prabhati & Ors.” by Sub Divisional Officer, Behrhor, District Alwar.

6. In the present writ petition, the writ petitioner prayed for issuance of direction against the state authorities for handing over the possession of disputed lands pursuant to the order dated

11.10.2002, that too, within a fixed timeline.

7. The writ petitioner succeeded in her attempt at the first instance and the Coordinate Bench of this Court, taking into consideration pendency of the execution proceedings since long, issued direction to the Deputy Collector, Behror, District Alwar, to decide the execution application expeditiously, preferably within a period of one year and with such direction, writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 09.11.2023.

8. Later on, applicants moved Civil Miscellaneous Application No.191/2024 dated 30.05.2024, for recalling the order dated

09.11.2023, then the Coordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 23.08.2024, recalled the order and restored the present writ petition to its original number with direction to the writ petitioner to implead applicants – Subhash & Ors. as party respondents in this writ petition. The Coordinate Bench of this Court in its order dated 23.08.2024 clearly observed that the stay orders passed by the Civil Courts in the pending litigation between the parties were not brought in the notice of this Court while obtaining directions for expeditious disposal of the execution proceedings. [2025:RJ-JP:12612] (5 of 7) [CW-8175/2023]

9. It is a matter of concern that despite of issuing directions by the Coordinate Bench of this High Court vide order dated

23.08.2024, the petitioner has not impleaded applicants – Subhash & Ors. as party respondents in this writ petition though writ petition has been listed thereafter, before the Court on various occasions i.e. 02.12.2024, 06.12.2024, 02.01.2025,

13.01.2025, 16.01.2025, 11.02.2025 and lastly on 11.03.2025.

10. Applicants – Subhash & Ors. have moved Civil Miscellaneous Application No.01/2024 on 13.01.2024 pointing out that in the guise of order dated 09.11.2023 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this High Court, before recalling of that order on 23.08.2024, writ petitioner obtained mutation entries of the disputed lands i.e. Entry Nos.2225 & 2220 vide order dated 23.08.2024 by the Tehsildar in her favour and the Tehsildar and Sub Divisional Officer issued directions to change the mutation in the name of petitioner only under the influence of the directions issued by the Coordinate Bench under order dated 09.11.2023. It has been pointed out that though applicants preferred an appeal against such mutation entries stating inter-alia that the order dated 09.11.2023 has been recalled, but the appellate authority dismissed the appeal in slipshod manner on 23.10.2024.

11. Taking into account all the above referred sequence of events, it is apparently clear on the face value that the writ petitioner misled the High Court and behind back of the applicants, obtained order dated 09.11.2023 in her favour and further, in the guise of such order, obtained mutation entries No.2225 & 2220 from the Tehsildar and the Sub Divisional Officer though later on, order dated 09.11.2023 itself has been recalled [2025:RJ-JP:12612] (6 of 7) [CW-8175/2023] by the High Court on 23.08.2024. Even thereafter, writ petitioner has not cared to implead applicant – Subhash & Ors. as party respondents, despite of issuing directions by this Court in the order dated 23.08.2024, however, since applicant – Subhash & Ors. have moved Civil Miscellaneous Application No.01/2024, bringing to the notice of all such mischievous acts of the writ petitioner and abuse of process of law, as has been done by the writ petitioner, this Court finds that filing of the instant writ petition and pursuing the same is serious misuse of the process of law and writ jurisdiction of the High Court has been invoked in a clandestine manner by the petitioner, which deserves to be deprecated.

12. In the backdrop of pending civil & revenue litigation as also stay orders of civil court in operation, no direction in favour of writ petitioner to handover possession of disputed land to her, can be issued. In addition, mutation entries got opened by the writ petitioner, pursuant to the order dated 09.11.2023, indeed deserves to be quashed with direction to restore the entries in the revenue record in the same position as were available before passing of the order dated 09.11.2023, because the order dated

09.11.2023 has ultimately been recalled by the High Court.

13. Thus, while dismissing the writ petition, this Court deems it just and proper to impose an exemplary cost of Rs.25,000/- upon the writ petitioner for misleading the Court and misusing the writ jurisdiction of High Court. The petitioner is directed to deposit the cost before the Sub Divisional Officer, Behror, District Alwar, in execution case no. 10/1999, which shall be payable to the applicants, who are already party in the execution case. [2025:RJ-JP:12612] (7 of 7) [CW-8175/2023]

14. As a final result, writ petition is hereby dismissed with exemplary cost of Rs.25,000/-, payable to the applicants, and simultaneously Civil Miscellaneous Application No.1/2024, filed by the applicants, also stands disposed of.

15. A copy of this order be sent to the Sub Divisional Officer, Behror, District Alwar.

16. All pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. SUNIL SOLANKI /258 (SUDESH BANSAL),J