Sain, R/o Bhankrota, Tehsil Sanganer, District Jaipur v. Gopal S/o Late

Ramratan Sain S/o Late Shri Hanuman, R/o Village Goner, Tehsil Sanganer, District Jaipur.

5. Manoj Sain S/o Late Shri Hanuman, R/o Village Goner, Tehsil Sanganer, District Jaipur.

6. Smt. Kamla W/o Late Shri Hanuman, R/o Village Goner, Tehsil Sanganer, District Jaipur.

7. Smt. Geeta D/o Late Shri Hanuman, R/o Village Goner, Tehsil Sanganer, District Jaipur.

8. Smt. Madhu D/o Late Shri Hanuman W/o Shri Chouthmal Sain, R/o Bhankrota, Tehsil Sanganer, District Jaipur. ----Petitioners Versus

1. Gopal S/o Late Shri Ramnath, R/o Goner, Tehsil Sanganer, District Jaipur.

2. Shankar S/o Late Shri Ramnath, R/o Goner, Tehsil Sanganer, District Jaipur.

3. Sitaram S/o Late Shri Ramnath, R/o Goner, Tehsil Sanganer, District Jaipur.

4. State Of Rajasthan Through Tehsildar, Sanganer, Tehsil Sanganer, District Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rahul Kamwar JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 23/07/2025 (2 of 4) [CW-11051/2025]

1. Again the petitioners have approached this Court by way of filing this writ petition challenging the order dated 02.04.2025 passed by the Board of Revenue (hereinafter referred to as “the Board”) by which an interim order has been passed directing the parties to maintain status-quo with regard to the site and records of the land in question.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the aforesaid order was passed by the Board without considering the arguments raised by the petitioners, hence, the petitioners approached this Court by way of filing S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6276/2025 and the same was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 28.04.2025 by issuing directions to the Board to decide the stay application expeditiously, preferably on the next date before it and after hearing the arguments of both sides, pass a reasoned and speaking order. Learned counsel submits that a copy of the aforesaid order dated 28.04.2025 was placed on the record of the Board on the next date, i.e., 09.05.2025, however, the order passed by this Court has not been complied with and the stay application has not been decided on the aforesaid next date. Thereafter, the case has been posted for 15.05.2025, 22.05.2025,

26.05.2025, 05.06.2025, 26.06.2025, 03.07.2025, 10.07.2025 &

24.07.2025, but inspite of passing of considerable time, till date the order passed by this Court has not been complied with. Hence, the order dated 02.04.2025 passed by the Board is required to be quashed and set-aside.

3. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on record. (3 of 4) [CW-11051/2025]

4. This is a second round of petition with regard to the same prayer, which was made by the petitioners. In the earlier writ petition, i.e., S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6276/2025 was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 28.04.2025 with the following observations and directions:- “1. By way of filing this writ petition, a challenge has been led to the order dated 02.04.2025 passed by the Board of Revenue (for short ‘the Board’), by which an interim order has been passed directing the parties to maintain status quo and the case was posted on 30.04.2025. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that while passing the aforesaid interim order, no reasons have been assigned and simply status quo order has been passed and the case has been deferred for another day. Counsel submits that at the time of passing of interim order, the Court is supposed to pass reasoned and speaking order, so in the interest of both parties, appropriate directions be issued to the Board to decide the stay application filed by the respondents along with their appeal by passing a reasoned and speaking order after hearing the arguments of both sides. In support of his contentions, he has placed reliance upon the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Assistant Tax Department, Works Contract & Leasing, Kota vs. Shukla & Brothers reported in 2010 (4) SCC 785. Commissioner, Commercial

3. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents opposed the arguments raised by the counsel for the petitioners and submitted that the aforesaid order has been passed after hearing both sides, hence, under these circumstances, interference of this Court is not warranted.

4. Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on the record.

5. This Court is not going into the controversy pending before the Board, but looking to the limited prayer made by the counsel for the petitioners, the instant writ petition stands disposed of by issuing directions to the Board to decide the stay application expeditiously, preferably on the next date after hearing (4 of 4) [CW-11051/2025] the arguments of both sides by passing a reasoned speaking order.

6. The stay application and all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.”

5. While deciding the aforesaid writ petition, a clear and specific direction was issued to the Board to decide the stay application expeditiously as early as possible, preferably on the next date. The next date before the Board was 09.05.2025 and on that date, a copy of the order was placed on record & the Board has not paid any heed to the order passed by this Court and several dates have been posted without hearing the arguments on the said application. It is not expected from the Board to not comply with the order/direction issued by this Court. The orders passed by this Court are required to be followed by the Members of the Board.

6. This writ petition stands disposed of re-iterating the same directions, which have been issued by this Court vide order dated

28.04.2025 and the Board is again directed to hear and decide the stay application on its merits on the next date or by posting a short date. It is made clear that, in case, the order dated

28.04.2025 passed by this Court and this order is not complied with again, then the situation would be viewed seriously and appropriate orders would be passed.

7. Stay application as well as all applications (pending, if any) also stand disposed of. Karan/47 (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J