M/S ARPITA BUILD MART PVT LTD. vs AUTHORIZED OFFICER — CW /3970/2026
Case under Rajasthan Land Revenue Act 1956 Section 90-A. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OF on 16th April 2026.
CNR: RJHC020184442026
Next Hearing
06th March 2026
Filing Number
CW /10571/2026
Filing Date
19-02-2026
Registration No
CW /3970/2026
Registration Date
25-02-2026
Judge
ANUROOP SINGHI
Coram
ANUROOP SINGHI
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
LAND REVENUE AND TENANCY MATTERS ( 1800 )
Judicial Branch
WRIT
Decision Date
16th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISPOSED OF
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
M/S ARPITA BUILD MART PVT LTD.
Adv. G P SHARMA
Respondent(s)
AUTHORIZED OFFICER
Adv. ,VIDYADHAR GATHALA,VED PRAKASH TRIPATHI 1123
MANDIR MURTI SHRI YUGAL KISHORE JI MAHARAJ
Adv. V.D. GATHALA AGC
STATE GOVERNMENT
Hearing History
Judge: ANUROOP SINGHI
FOR ADMISSION- FRESH (WITH STAY)
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | FOR ADMISSION- FRESH (WITH STAY) |
Orders
The High Court of Rajasthan disposed of 11 interconnected civil writ petitions by directing the Divisional Commissioner, Ajmer to expeditiously decide pending appeals within four months, with all parties maintaining status-quo on the disputed land and its records until final disposal. The court clarified that the Appellate Authority must decide the appeals independently without being influenced by previous lower court orders, and allowed applicants liberty to seek impleadment of additional persons before the Commissioner. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The High Court of Rajasthan disposed of 11 interconnected civil writ petitions by directing the Divisional Commissioner, Ajmer to expeditiously decide pending appeals within four months, with all parties maintaining status-quo on the disputed land and its records until final disposal. The court clarified that the Appellate Authority must decide the appeals independently without being influenced by previous lower court orders, and allowed applicants liberty to seek impleadment of additional persons before the Commissioner. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts