Vijay Adarsh Vidhya Mandir Samiti vs State of Rajasthan and Others

Arun Bhansali, J.—This writ petition is directed against the enquiry report dated 2.5.2014 and subsequent communications issued by the respondents dated 26.6.2014, 17.7.2014 and 15.10.2014 calling upon the petitioner to rectify the deficiency pointed out.

The petitioner is a Society registered under the provisions of the Rajasthan Societies Registration Act, 1958 (''the Act'') and being interested to start a new college named ''Kanku Vijay College of Higher Education'', the Society approached the respondents seeking permission to do the needful.

The petitioner applied alongwith the requisite Fixed Deposit receipts of Rs. 10 lacs and a further demand draft of Rs. 93,000/- with the respondents. It is inter-alia indicated that the petitioner has been allotted 22 Bigha land for education purpose by the State Government on 30.8.2006 vide allotment letter of the same date. The allotment letter indicates the allotment in favour of the petitioner-Society and pursuant to the allotment the entire sum for allotment was deposited by the Society. Thereafter, by order dated 13.9.2006 issued by the District Collector, Pali, the petitioner-Society was allotted land under the provisions of the Rajasthan Land Revenue (Allotment of unoccupied Government Agriculture Land for Construction of Schools, Colleges, Dispensaries, Dharamshalas and other buildings of public utility) Rules, 1963 (''the Rules''). However, when the lease deed in pursuance of allotment was executed on 13.9.2006, the lessee in the lease deed was shown as .

The respondents constituted a committee for inspection pursuant to the application filed by the petitioner-Society for grant of permission to start a college and the inspection committee by its report dated 2.5.2014 indicated that the land in question was not in the name of the Society. Whereafter, the petitioner filed an affidavit to the respondents inter-alia indicating that the registration has been done as a representative of the Society and the Manager and his family has no personal interest in the land and the property belongs to Shree Vijay Adarsh Vidhya Mandir Samiti, Pali. However the respondents insisted on getting the lease deed rectified and in absence thereof, the permission for starting the college has not been granted.

Aggrieved against the action of the respondents, the writ petition seeking the reliefs as indicated hereinbefore has been sought.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that from a look at the allotment letter dated 30.8.2006, allotment order dated 13.9.2006 and the lease deed itself, it is apparent that it is the Society Shree Vijay Adarsh Vidhya Mandir Samiti, which is lessee of the land in question and the Manager - Gopi Das Ramawat has no personal interest in the said land. Even in the lease deed, Gopi Das Ramawat has been indicated as Manager, which indicates his status and not his identify and therefore, the respondents are not justified in treating the said lease deed as not in the name of the Society and therefore, the respondents be directed to do the needful qua granting permission to the petitioner-Society.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that a bare look at the lease deed Ex.-9 clearly indicates that the same has been issued in the name of Gopi Das Ramawat and though the same is not in consonance with the orders of allotment, it is required of the petitioner to get the document rectified, in absence whereof in view of the requirements wherein it is required of the Society to be the lessee and/or the owner of the land, the permission cannot be granted by the respondents and therefore, the writ petition deserves to be dismissed.

I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties.

From the material placed on record, it is apparent that the Society was registered way-back on 1.8.1988, whereafter the allotment of land vide Annexure-5 took place on 30.8.2006 in the name of Society only. However, it appears that as the communications were issued by the District Collector pursuant to the letter of allotment in the name of Manager of the Society and the amount was deposited by the Society through the Manager. Whereafter, the allotment order dated 13.9.2006 was issued in the name of the Society only, which clearly indicates that it is the Society, which is the lessee of the land in question. However, while executing the lease deed by the Collector, apparently, instead of indicating the Society as the lessee and whereafter indicate it ''through the Manager'', the name of Manager - Gopi Das Ramawat was indicated and whereafter the name of the Society has been indicated as lessee. Thereafter, when the objection in this regard was raised by the inspection committee, the Manager - Gopi Das Ramawat presented affidavit dated 12.5.2014 before the respondents clearly indicating that he has no personal interest in the land/lease in question and his name in the lease deed has been indicated as representative of the Society only. Whereafter, the present writ petition has been filed wherein also the said stand regarding the lease deed has been reiterated by the Society and the petition is supported by affidavit of said Gopi Das Ramawat in his capacity as Manager, which fortifies the stand taken by the Society qua the lease deed and therefore, apparently, on account of apparent mistake in the lease deed and that also only of the indication of status, it cannot be said that the respondents were justified to deny the grant of permission as in the reply no other deficiency has been pointed out.

However, in view of the fact that a doubt has been raised by the respondent-State on the nature of the lease deed/lessee indicated therein, it would be appropriate if the Society and the said Gopi Das Ramawat file two separate affidavits again before the respondent-State indicating the status of the land in question i.e. clarifying that the Society is the lessee and not Gopi Das Ramawat within a period of two weeks.

Besides the above, it would be appropriate for the petitioner-Society to get the lease deed rectified under the provisions of Article 24 of the Rajasthan Stamp Act, 1998 providing for a supplementary instrument to correct clerical error in any instrument chargeable with duty and in respect of which proper duty has already been paid read with Rule 153 of the Rajasthan Registration Rules, 1955 so as to put to an end any controversy qua the lease deed for all times to come within a reasonable period. For execution of such instrument, the District Collector, Pali would co-operate with the petitioner-Society.

However, for lack of such rectified instrument, the respondents shall not delay the grant of permission to the petitioner-Society.

In view of the above discussion, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is allowed with the above directions. The respondents are directed to take steps for grant of permission to the petitioner-Society as soon as the affidavits as indicated hereinbefore are presented before the respondents preferably within a period of three weeks.

No order as to costs.