{"id":259470,"date":"2009-03-03T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-03-02T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/devi-lal-ors-vs-state-ors-on-3-march-2009"},"modified":"2016-10-12T01:43:59","modified_gmt":"2016-10-11T20:13:59","slug":"devi-lal-ors-vs-state-ors-on-3-march-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/devi-lal-ors-vs-state-ors-on-3-march-2009","title":{"rendered":"Devi Lal & Ors vs State & Ors on 3 March, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur<\/div>\n
Devi Lal & Ors vs State & Ors on 3 March, 2009<\/div>\n
                               1\n\n S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 4515\/1996\n (Devilal & others Vs. State of Rajasthan & ors.)\n\n\nDate of Order ::   3rd March 2009.\n\n\n\n      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI\n\n\nMr.V.K.Aggarwal for the petitioners\n\nMr.K.K.Bissa         ) for the respondents\nMr.Kamal Deep Singh )\nfor Mr.Kulwant Singh )\n\nBY THE COURT:<\/pre>\n
      By way of this writ petition, challenge is given to the<\/p>\n
order dated 06.02.1996 as passed by the Additional Collector<\/p>\n
(Administration), Sriganganagar while dismissing Panchayat<\/p>\n
Revision Petition No.8\/1996.\n<\/p>\n
      By filing the revision petition aforesaid on 12.09.1994,<\/p>\n
the petitioners questioned the allotment of plots Nos.415 and<\/p>\n
416 by Gram Panchayat, Mirjewala to the wife of the Sarpanch<\/p>\n
of the said Panchayat (respondent No.4 herein) essentially on<\/p>\n
the grounds that the allotment was made without following the<\/p>\n
procedure prescribed by the Rules and that the land in<\/p>\n
question was a part of public way.         It was contended on<\/p>\n
behalf of the allottee before the Revisional Authority that in its<\/p>\n
meeting dated 07.12.1979 that was presided by the Up-<\/p>\n
Sarpanch, the Panchayat adopted the resolution whereby 27
\n                               2<\/span><\/p>\n
plots were allotted and therein, allotment was also made in her<\/p>\n
favour on the price of Rs.200\/-that was the same as charged<\/p>\n
in relation to the other plots of land and sanction was also<\/p>\n
obtained from the Assistant Collector, Sriganganagar. It was<\/p>\n
also contended that there was no proof about the land in<\/p>\n
question being a part of public road; that allotments       were<\/p>\n
made 17 years back and if at all it were a part of public land,<\/p>\n
the dispute would have arisen long before. It was further<\/p>\n
contended that the allotments were made duly in accordance<\/p>\n
with law and the petition had been filed with oblique intentions.<\/p>\n
      The learned Additional Collector proceeded to reject the<\/p>\n
revision petition so filed by the present petitioners on the<\/p>\n
consideration that the land was allotted by way of open auction<\/p>\n
wherein the non-applicant had been the highest bidder; and<\/p>\n
about 27 plots were auctioned on the given date and the price<\/p>\n
in relation to other plots was nearly the same and that no<\/p>\n
irregularity was noticed in the matter. The learned Additional<\/p>\n
Collector said,-\n<\/p>\n
      ”\u0939\u092e\u0928 \u0909\u092d\u092f\u092a\u0915 \u0915 \u092c\u0939\u0938 \u092a\u0930 \u092e\u0928\u0928 \u0915\u0915\u092f \u0964 \u092a\u0924 \u0935\u0932
\n      \u0924\u0925 \u0905\u0927 . \u0928\u092f \u092f \u0932\u092f \u0917 \u092e \u092a\u091a \u092f\u0924 \u0915 \u0930\u0930\u0915 \u0930# \u0915
\n      \u0905\u0935\u0932$\u0915\u0928 \u0915\u0915\u092f \u0924$ \u092a \u092f \u0915\u0915 \u0935\u0935\u0935 \u0926’\u0924 \u092d(\u0916\u0930 \u0936 \u092e\u0924\u0924
\n      \u0915\u0938\u0930 \u0915$ \u0916,\u0932 \u0924\u0928\u0932 \u092e \u092e- \u0935\u0935\u0915\u092f \u0915\u0930 \u0906\u0935\u091f\u0928 \u0915\u0915\u092f
\n      \u0917\u092f \u09392 \u0964 \u0907\u0928 \u092d(\u0916\u0930 \u0915 \u0909\u091a\u091a\u0924\u092e \u092c$\u0932 \u0905\u092a \u09256\u092f
\n      \u0915 \u0930\u0939 \u09392 \u0964 \u0909\u0938 \u0930$\u091c \u0917 \u092e \u092a\u091a \u092f\u0924 \u0928 27 \u092d(\u0916\u0930
\n      \u0915 \u0924\u0928\u0932 \u092e \u0915 \u09392 \u0964 \u0909\u0928\u0915 \u0930 \u09369 \u092d \u0932\u0917\u092d\u0917 \u0907\u0924\u0928
\n      \u09392 \u0964 \u0938\u092d \u092d(\u0916\u0930 \u092a\u0930 \u0916\u0930 ” \u0930 \u0915 \u092c\u092c\u091c \u09392 \u0964 \u091c\u091c\u0938\u092e-
\n      \u0905\u092a \u09256\u092f \u092d \u090f\u0915 \u09392 \u0964 \u0917 \u092e \u092a\u091a \u092f\u0924 \u0926 \u0930 \u0906\u0935\u091f\u0928
\n      \u0915\u0915\u092f \u0917\u092f \u092d(\u0916\u0930 \u092e- \u0915$\u0908 \u0905\u0924\u0928\u092f\u0936\u092e\u0924\u0924 \u092a \u092f \u091c \u0928
\n      \u092a\u0924 \u0924 \u0928\u0939 \u0939$\u0924 \u09392 \u0964<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\n                                 3<\/span><\/p>\n
      \u0905\u0924: \u0924\u0928\u0917\u0930 \u0928 \u0915\u0924 # \u0915 \u0924\u0928\u0917\u0930 \u0928 \u0938 \u0930\u0939 \u0928 \u0939$\u0928 \u0915
\n      \u0915 \u0930\u0923 \u0916 \u0930\u0930\u091c \u0915 \u091c \u0924 \u09392 \u0964 \u0935 \u0917 \u092e \u092a\u091a \u092f\u0924 \u0915
\n      \u0906’9 7-12-79 \u092c\u0939 \u0932 \u0930\u0916 \u091c \u0924 \u09392 \u0964 \u0924\u0928\u0923#\u092f \u0915
\n      \u090f\u0915 \u092a\u0924\u0924 \u092e\u092f \u0930\u0930\u0915 \u0930# \u0905\u0927 . \u0928\u092f \u092f \u0932\u092f \u0917 \u092e \u092a\u091a \u092f\u0924
\n      \u0936\u092e\u091c@\u0935 \u0932 \u0915$ \u092a\u0935A\u0924 \u0915 \u091c \u0935 \u0964”<\/p>\n
      The order aforesaid has been questioned in this writ<\/p>\n
petition with the submissions that it suffers from errors<\/p>\n
apparent on the face of record; that the learned Additional<\/p>\n
Collector has not examined the entire material available on<\/p>\n
record; that the resolution dated 07.12.1979 seems to have<\/p>\n
been scored out as would appear from the photostat certified<\/p>\n
copy supplied to the petitioners (Annex.3); that there had not<\/p>\n
been any compliance of the requirements of the Rules like<\/p>\n
preparation of plan, site inspection, publication of notice,and<\/p>\n
invitation of objections etc. It is submitted that the resolution<\/p>\n
dated 07.12.1979 cannot be said to be existing in law and<\/p>\n
approval of sale as allegedly made on 17.01.1983 cannot be<\/p>\n
said to be justified. It is also submitted that the revision petition<\/p>\n
was filed only upon the petitioners’ coming to know of the<\/p>\n
allotment when the adopted son of Sarpanch Sukh Ram<\/p>\n
attempted to raise construction on the disputed plot.<\/p>\n
      Per contra, it is contended on behalf of the respondents<\/p>\n
that the respondent No.4 had purchased the abadi land in<\/p>\n
open auction on the basis of the highest bid and the land has<\/p>\n
rightly been transferred to her; that there is no illegality or<\/p>\n
impropriety in the order particularly when 27 plots were put to
\n                               4<\/span><\/p>\n
auction and price of other plots is almost equal to the auction<\/p>\n
price paid by the respondent No.4.\n<\/p>\n
      Having given a thoughtful consideration to the entire<\/p>\n
matter, this Court is clearly of opinion that the cursory order<\/p>\n
(Annex.6) as passed by the learned Additional Collector in<\/p>\n
disposal of the revision petition cannot be approved.<\/p>\n
      As noticed above, the essential considerations weighing<\/p>\n
with the learned Revisional Authority had been that the plot<\/p>\n
was allotted in open auction and the respondent No.4 had<\/p>\n
been the highest bidder; and that the Panchayat had<\/p>\n
auctioned 27 plots and price in relation to other plots was also<\/p>\n
about the same. However, a fundamental snag is noticed in<\/p>\n
the matter that the respondent No.4 has been allotted not one<\/p>\n
but two plots of land bearing Nos.415 and 416. If at all it be<\/p>\n
assumed that there had been auction proceedings and<\/p>\n
different plots of land were allotted by way of such auction, it<\/p>\n
has not been given out as to what had been the<\/p>\n
measurements of the other plots put to auction and if the other<\/p>\n
bidders put their bids in relation to one plot of land or more?<\/p>\n
Then, The resolution dated 07.12.1979 is lacking in material<\/p>\n
particulars about identification numbers and measurements of<\/p>\n
the plots so auctioned and their location. It is also noticed<\/p>\n
from the resolution dated 07.12.1979 that in relation to at least<\/p>\n
one person Shishpal Singh son of Balraj, the auction price is
\n                                  5<\/span><\/p>\n
stated at Rs.500\/-. It was seriously questionable             if the<\/p>\n
respondent No.4 extended the bid for one plot or more? The<\/p>\n
fact could not have been ignored altogether that the<\/p>\n
questioned allotment had been to none other than wife of the<\/p>\n
then Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat; and it is also<\/p>\n
noteworthy that on the basis of the resolution dated<\/p>\n
07.12.1979, the patta came to be issued only in the year 1983.<\/p>\n
.        Having regard to the overall facts and circumstances,<\/p>\n
this Court is clearly of opinion that the consideration of the<\/p>\n
revision petition as filed by the petitioners by the Revisional<\/p>\n
Authority has fallen short of the requirements of adequate<\/p>\n
adjudication of the questions calling for determination with<\/p>\n
reference to the relevant record; and of the decision of the<\/p>\n
matter by a reasoned and speaking order.\n<\/p>\n
         In this view of the matter, this Court is of opinion that it<\/p>\n
shall be in the interest of justice to set aside the impugned<\/p>\n
order and to restore the said revision petition to the file of<\/p>\n
Additional     Collector   (Administration),   Sriganganagar      for<\/p>\n
disposal in accordance with law after examining the concerned<\/p>\n
record and after extending adequate opportunity of hearing to<\/p>\n
the concerned parties; and by way of a reasoned speaking<\/p>\n
order.\n<\/p>\n
         In the result, this writ petition succeeds and is allowed<\/p>\n
to the extent indicated above; the impugned order dated
\n                                 6<\/span><\/p>\n
06.02.1996 (Annex.6) is quashed and set aside; Panchayat<\/p>\n
Revision Petition No.8\/1996 shall stand restored to the file of<\/p>\n
the Additional Collector (Administration), Sriganganagar who<\/p>\n
shall re-consider and decide the same in accordance with law<\/p>\n
while keeping in view the observations foregoing. The parties<\/p>\n
through their counsel present before this Court shall stand at<\/p>\n
notice to appear before the said Revisional Authority on<\/p>\n
02.04.2009.\n<\/p>\n
      Having regard to the circumstances of the case, the<\/p>\n
parties are left to bear their own costs of this writ petition.<\/p>\n
                                    (DINESH MAHESHWARI), J.\n<\/p>\n
\nMK\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur Devi Lal & Ors vs State & Ors on 3 March, 2009 1 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 4515\/1996 (Devilal & others Vs. State of Rajasthan & ors.) Date of Order :: 3rd March 2009. HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI Mr.V.K.Aggarwal for the petitioners Mr.K.K.Bissa ) for the respondents Mr.Kamal […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,19],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-259470","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-rajasthan-high-court-jodhpur"],"yoast_head":"\nDevi Lal & Ors vs State & Ors on 3 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/devi-lal-ors-vs-state-ors-on-3-march-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Devi Lal & Ors vs State & Ors on 3 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/devi-lal-ors-vs-state-ors-on-3-march-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-03-02T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-10-11T20:13:59+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/devi-lal-ors-vs-state-ors-on-3-march-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/devi-lal-ors-vs-state-ors-on-3-march-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Devi Lal & Ors vs State & Ors on 3 March, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-03-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-10-11T20:13:59+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/devi-lal-ors-vs-state-ors-on-3-march-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1086,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/devi-lal-ors-vs-state-ors-on-3-march-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/devi-lal-ors-vs-state-ors-on-3-march-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/devi-lal-ors-vs-state-ors-on-3-march-2009\",\"name\":\"Devi Lal & Ors vs State & Ors on 3 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-03-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-10-11T20:13:59+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/devi-lal-ors-vs-state-ors-on-3-march-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/devi-lal-ors-vs-state-ors-on-3-march-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/devi-lal-ors-vs-state-ors-on-3-march-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Devi Lal & Ors vs State & Ors on 3 March, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Devi Lal & Ors vs State & Ors on 3 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/devi-lal-ors-vs-state-ors-on-3-march-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Devi Lal & Ors vs State & Ors on 3 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/devi-lal-ors-vs-state-ors-on-3-march-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-03-02T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-10-11T20:13:59+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/devi-lal-ors-vs-state-ors-on-3-march-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/devi-lal-ors-vs-state-ors-on-3-march-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Devi Lal & Ors vs State & Ors on 3 March, 2009","datePublished":"2009-03-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-10-11T20:13:59+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/devi-lal-ors-vs-state-ors-on-3-march-2009"},"wordCount":1086,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/devi-lal-ors-vs-state-ors-on-3-march-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/devi-lal-ors-vs-state-ors-on-3-march-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/devi-lal-ors-vs-state-ors-on-3-march-2009","name":"Devi Lal & Ors vs State & Ors on 3 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-03-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-10-11T20:13:59+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/devi-lal-ors-vs-state-ors-on-3-march-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/devi-lal-ors-vs-state-ors-on-3-march-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/devi-lal-ors-vs-state-ors-on-3-march-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Devi Lal & Ors vs State & Ors on 3 March, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/259470","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=259470"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/259470\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=259470"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=259470"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=259470"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}