Himmata Ram vs State Of Rajasthan & Ors.

The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking following reliefs:

The essential facts, as projected in the writ petition, are that the revenue village Dantal is situated in Tehsil Falsund, District Jaisalmer, and, as per the Census of 2011, has a population of 1,716. The Gram Panchayat, Dantal, passed Resolution No.1 dated 26.01.2025, proposing the creation of a new revenue village to be carved out from the existing revenue village Dantal, initially proposed to be named “Shri Chhotsa Nagar”.

Pursuant to the aforesaid resolution, the Tehsildar, Falsund, the Land Revenue Inspector and the Patwari, Dantal, issued a certificate stating, inter alia, that there was no dispute regarding the proposed name, caste, religion, Dharma or Sampradaya in relation to the proposed revenue village. It was further certified that there was no dispute with regard to the central point and boundary line of the proposed revenue village and that the proposed headquarters of the new revenue village was situated on Government land.

Thereafter, the Sub-Divisional Officer prepared and forwarded a proposal for creation of the new revenue village “Shri Chhotsa Nagar”. The proposal was submitted to the State Government and vide order/notification dated 12.03.2025, the Revenue Department approved the creation of “Shri Chhotsa Nagar” as a new revenue village carved out from Dantal village, Tehsil Falsund. The said decision was thereafter communicated to the District Collector, Jaisalmer.

Aggrieved by the aforesaid notification, the petitioner preferred S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.12604/2025 before this Court. After hearing the parties, this Court, vide order dated 11.07.2025, directed cancellation of the name “Shri Chhotsa Nagar” as the name of the revenue village and directed the authorities to assign a fresh name to the revenue village in accordance with law.

In purported compliance with the aforesaid order of this Court, the State Government issued an amended notification dated 10.11.2025, whereby the earlier notification dated 12.03.2025 was modified and the name “Shri Chhotsa Nagar” was deleted/cancelled as the name of the newly created revenue village.

It is the case of the petitioner that, thereafter, the Sub-Divisional Officer, vide communication dated 02.08.2025, forwarded a proposal to the District Collector, Jaisalmer, stating that the villagers of the proposed revenue village had submitted a representation requesting that the village be named “Ambedkar Nagar”. The representation stated that Dr. B.R. Ambedkar was the architect of the Constitution of India and a recipient of the Bharat Ratna and, therefore, the name “Ambedkar Nagar” ought to be assigned to the newly created revenue village. The Sub-Divisional Officer accordingly recommended that “Ambedkar Nagar” be considered in place of “Shri Chhotsa Nagar”.

Subsequently, on 08.12.2025, the Tehsildar submitted a recommendation to the Sub-Divisional Officer after conducting a spot inspection and verifying the factual position. The said recommendation referred to an earlier report submitted by the Sarpanch, wherein it was stated that the khatedars had expressed their consent for naming the village “Chhota Jadam Nagar” in place of “Shri Chhotsa Nagar”. The spot inspection report was also enclosed with the said communication.

On the basis of the aforesaid recommendation of the Tehsildar, the Sub-Divisional Officer forwarded a proposal to the District Collector, Jaisalmer, recommending that the name of the proposed revenue village be changed from “Shri Chhotsa Nagar” to “Chhota Jadam Nagar”, purportedly in compliance with the directions issued by this Court.

The petitioner, along with other villagers, submitted objections/representations before the District Collector, Jaisalmer, opposing the proposal to name the revenue village “Chhota Jadam Nagar”. It was specifically contended that the proposed name was allegedly derived from the name of the brother of the former Sarpanch, namely, Chhotu Singh, and that “Jadam” denotes a sub-caste of the Rajput Bhati community. It was, therefore, alleged that the proposed name was associated with a particular individual as well as a particular caste/community and, consequently, ought not to be accepted as the name of a revenue village. The petitioner and the other objectors accordingly requested the competent authorities not to approve the said proposal.

However, notwithstanding the objections raised by the petitioner and other villagers, the State Government, vide notification dated 31.12.2025, approved the creation of the new revenue village under the name “Jadam Nagar”.

It is the specific grievance of the petitioner that the objections raised by the petitioner and other villagers were not duly considered by the respondent authorities before the impugned decision was taken. According to the petitioner, the name “Jadam Nagar” is referable to the “Jadam” sub-caste of the Rajput Bhati community and, therefore, suffers from the same vice which had earlier led to the cancellation of the name “Shri Chhotsa Nagar”, which, according to the petitioner, was also associated with a particular individual and caste.

The petitioner has, accordingly, assailed the action of the respondent authorities in proposing/approving the name “Chhota Jadam Nagar”/“Jadam Nagar” for the newly created revenue village and has prayed for appropriate reliefs from this Court.

The writ petition has thus been preferred, inter alia, on the ground that the objections and representations submitted by the petitioner and the other villagers were not considered in accordance with law before the impugned decision was taken, hence, the present writ petition.

Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently submitted that the name of the newly created revenue village was kept in the name of the former Sarpanch Shri Chhotu Singh as the word “Jadam” is a sub-caste of the caste “Rajput Bhati Community”. He submits that initially when the name of newly created village was recommended to be kept as “Shri Chhotsa Nagar” and the same was not agreed upon by some of the villagers and on having challenged the same before this Court, the name of the newly created village was not kept as “Shri Chhotsa Nagar”, however, in the fresh exercise having been undertaken by the respondents, again the name of ‘Jadam Nagar’ has been kept, which essentially denotes a sub-caste of “Rajput Bhati Community” and the same depicts to have been kept in the name of “Chhotu Singh”.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the name of the newly created village cannot be kept in violation of the guidelines issued by the State Government in its Circular dated 20.08.2009 and other circulars issued from time to time. He submits that the name of the newly created village cannot be kept in the name of any person, caste, sub-caste or religion and, therefore, in view of stipulated guidelines issued by the State Government, the name of the newly created village “Jadam Nagar” is in direct violation of the guidelines issued by the State Government from time to time. Learned counsel further submits that the action of the respondents is contrary to the objections submitted by the villagers and the same is also contrary to the judgment of this Court rendered in batch of writ petitions led by Moola Ram v. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3470/2025) & other connected matters and the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bhika Ram & Anr. vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.L.P © No.27965/2025), decided on 19.11.2025. He, therefore, prays that the writ petition may be allowed and the Notification dated 31.12.2025 (Annex.11) showing the name of newly created village as ‘Jadam Nagar’ may be quashed and set aside.

Per contra, learned counsel for the State, while opposing the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the name of the newly created village has been kept absolutely in consonance with the guidelines and the Notifications issued by the State of Rajasthan. He further submits that the name of the newly created village has been kept in consonance with the guidelines of the Notification dated 20.08.2009 and the other connected notifications issued by the State Government from time to time. The name of the newly created village i.e. ‘Jadam Nagar’ cannot be said to be having any connection with the brother of the Former Sarpanch, any person, caste or religion. He further submits that the State Government has named the village ‘Jadam Nagar’ after due application of mind as the recommendation made by the District Collector for keeping the name as “Chhotsa Jadam Nagar” has been considered in true letter and spirit of the Notifications and, therefore, the earlier recommendations made by the District Collector has been modified by keeping the name of the village as ‘Jadam Nagar’ instead of ‘Chhotsa Jadam Nagar. He submits that the entire exercise of naming the newly created village is in consonance with the judgments rendered by this Court in Moola Ram’s case (supra) and the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Bhika Ram (supra). Thus, he submits that the name of the village as Jadam Nagar cannot be related to have been kept in the name of the brother of former Sapranch and, therefore, he prays that the writ petition may be dismissed.

We have considered the submissions made at the Bar and have gone through the relevant record of the case.

As noted here-in-above, earlier the petitioner has filed a writ petition before this Court challenging the newly created name of Village i.e. ‘Chhotsa Nagar’ in the name of brother of the former Sarpanch and in pursuance of the directions issued by this Court vide order dated 11.07.2025, the State Government has undertaken fresh exercise for renaming the aforesaid newly created village. The exercise undertaken by the State Government for creation of the new revenue village was recommended by the Sub Divisional Officer and Collector and the State Government, after taking into consideration the Notifications issued by the State Government from time to time, the relevant circulars and the judgments of this Court as well as Hon’ble Surpeme Court, has named the village as ‘Jadam Nagar’.

In view of the above, we find that the State Government has not committed any illegality, while renaming the new revenue village as ‘Jadam Nagar’ as the same cannot be said to be in the name of any person, caste or sub-caste or religion. The impugned Notification is thus in consonance with the conditions mentioned in Circular dated 20.08.2009 and other the other circulars issued from time to time by the State Government.

Accordingly, the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the newly created village has been named after the brother of former Sarpanch i.e. Chhotu Singh is noted to be rejected. Thus, in the considered opinion of this Court to relate the name of newly created village with Chhotu Singh, the brother of the Former Sapranch is not justified or correct. This Court in the earlier writ petition has categorically held that the name of newly created village cannot be in violation of the circulars issued by the State Government dated 20.08.2009 and other connected circulars issued from time to time. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bhika Ram (supra) had an occasion to deal with the question raised in the present writ petition and it was held as under :-

Thus, we find that the Notification dated 31.12.2025 issued by the State Government naming the newly created revenue village as ‘Jadam Nagar’ does not suffer from any illegality and, therefore, no interference is called for.

The writ petition, therefore, fails and the same is dismissed.

All other pending application, if any, also stand disposed of.