Case Note & Summary
The present writ petition was filed before the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jodhpur challenging allotment letters dated 25.08.2022, seeking regularization of land in Khasra No. 713, and quashing of communication dated 01.01.2025 for police assistance. The petitioners, Ashok Damor and Anur Devi Damor, claimed to be grandsons of Shri Nanka @ Nanji and alleged ancestral ownership of agricultural land in Khasra Nos. 709, 710, 711, 713, and 714. The land was acquired by the Rajasthan Housing Board for a residential colony, with acquisition proceedings initiated in 1988 and a final award dated 30.07.1990. The compensation was enhanced by a Civil Court reference order dated 27.02.2008, which was challenged by the Housing Board, but the stay was dismissed on 13.01.2011. The petitioners alleged that respondent No.4, Naresh Chandra, fraudulently obtained a Power of Attorney and agreement to sell from Shri Nanka in April 2017 and caused allotment of 15% developed land (19 plots) to be issued in the name of Shri Nanka on 25.08.2022. The petitioners contended that respondent No.4 then sold some plots and deprived them of their share. They further stated that they were in possession of 13217 sq ft in Khasra No. 713 with a residential house on 1925 sq ft and sought regularization. The respondent Housing Board issued communication dated 01.01.2025 seeking police assistance for dispossession, and an FIR was lodged against the petitioners for unauthorized possession. The respondents opposed the writ petition, arguing that the land was not ancestral, that the petitioners had no right, and that Shri Nanka had lodged a police complaint against them on 18.07.2023. They also contended that the Power of Attorney was duly executed and that the petitioners had accepted a Gift Deed dated 06.11.2025 from Shri Nanka. A preliminary objection was raised that the registered allotment letters could only be challenged before a Civil Court, not under Article 226. The respondents further argued that the communication for police assistance was justified as the land had vested in the Housing Board, and that the petitioners had suppressed material facts, namely the pendency of S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14260/2023. The court, after hearing arguments, noted the admitted facts regarding acquisition and allotment and began to discuss the legal proposition that rights in immovable property created through registered documents cannot be dealt with in writ jurisdiction. However, the judgment text provided is incomplete and ends mid-sentence; the final decision on the prayers, the maintainability of the writ petition, and the merits of the fraud and regularization claims are not available in the excerpt. Therefore, no final ratio or operative order can be extracted from the available text.
Headnote
A) Writ Jurisdiction - Cancellation of Registered Allotment Letters - Maintainability - Constitution of India, 1950, Article 226 - Respondents raised a preliminary objection that registered allotment letters/pattas dated 25.08.2022 can only be challenged and cancelled by a competent Civil Court, not in writ jurisdiction. The court noted this objection but the available judgment text ends without a ruling on maintainability. (Paras 8, 15) B) Land Acquisition - Regularization of Possession - Ancestral Property Claim - Constitution of India, 1950, Article 226 - Petitioners claimed ancestral possession over 13217 sq ft in Khasra No. 713 with a residential house on 1925 sq ft and sought regularization; respondents contended the land is not ancestral and that encroachment extends beyond the house area. The court noted the acquisition and allotment history but did not resolve the factual dispute. (Paras 5, 10, 13) C) Fraud and Misrepresentation - Power of Attorney and Agreement to Sell - Validity of Documents - Constitution of India, 1950, Article 226 - Petitioners alleged that respondent No.4 fraudulently obtained a Power of Attorney dated 12.04.2017 and agreement to sell dated 13.04.2017 from the aged landholder; respondents argued the documents were duly executed and that petitioners accepted a subsequent Gift Deed dated 06.11.2025. The court did not decide on the fraud claim in the provided text. (Paras 3, 7) D) Suppression of Material Facts - Non-disclosure of Pending Writ Petition - Clean Hands Doctrine - Constitution of India, 1950, Article 226 - Respondents argued that petitioners suppressed the pendency of S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14260/2023, and therefore the writ petition should be dismissed on the ground of unclean hands. The court noted this argument but did not rule. (Para 11)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the writ petition is maintainable for cancellation of registered allotment letters/pattas under Article 226 of the Constitution of India; whether communication dated 01.01.2025 seeking police assistance for dispossession is valid; whether petitioners are entitled to regularization of land in Khasra No. 713; whether the petition suffers from suppression of material facts regarding a pending writ petition.
Final Decision
Not mentioned - the judgment text provided is incomplete; the court's final decision is not available in the given excerpt.
Law Points
- Registered documents creating rights in immovable property can only be challenged before a Civil Court
- not in writ jurisdiction under Article 226
- suppression of material facts in a writ petition may lead to dismissal
- right to regularization of long-standing possession over acquired land requires factual determination.
