Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur
Commissioner, Jodhpur Development … vs Shekhar Bissa on 5 March, 2026
Author: Kuldeep Mathur
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
[2026:RJ-JD:9473]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9202/2020
1. Commissioner, Jodhpur Development Authority (JDA),
Jodhpur.
2. Secretary, Jodhpur Development Authority, Jodhpur.
3. Deputy Commissioner (West), Jodhpur Development
Authority, Jodhpur.
----Petitioners
Versus
Shekhar Bissa S/o Shyam Sunder Bissa, Raghunathpura, Near
Shiv Mandir, Sivanchi Gate, Jodhpur.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajat Dave
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Varsha Bissa
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
Order
Date of Reserve: 17/02/2026
Date of Pronouncement: 05/03/2026
1. By way of filing the present writ petition under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India, petitioner has prayed for the following
reliefs:-
“i) By appropriate writ, order or direction, the judgment and
decree dated 06-01-2020 (Annex-1) passed by the Permanent
Lok Adalat, Jodhpur in case no. 84/2019 may kindly be declared
illegal and be quashed and set aside and consequently, the suit
filed by the respondent-plaintiff may kindly be dismissed with
exemplary costs.
ii) Any other appropriate order or direction which this Hon’ble
Court may deem fit just and proper in the facts and
circumstances of the case may kindly be passed in favour of the
petitioner.
ⅲ) Costs of the present writ petition may kindly be awarded to
the petitioners.”
2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the respondent –
Shekhar Bissa applied for allotment of a plot with the Jodhpur
Development Authority (JDA), Jodhpur. The JDA, Jodhpur
conducted a draw of lots (lottery) on 15.10.2010 for the purpose
(Uploaded on 05/03/2026 at 03:46:30 PM)
(Downloaded on 05/03/2026 at 08:56:48 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:9473] (2 of 6) [CW-9202/2020]
of allotment of plots under the Rajeev Gandhi Nagar Awasiya
Yojana. As per the result of the draw of lots, Plot No. A-415 came
to be allotted in favour of the respondent. A Patta was thereafter
issued in his favour, which was registered on 21.05.2010.
According to the respondent, though paper possession of Plot No.
A-415 was handed over to him, in reality, no proper access was
available to reach the said plot. It was further alleged that the
plots were not properly demarcated and no boundary marks were
available at the site to identify the plots.
3. The respondent filed an application before the Permanent
Lok Adalat, Jodhpur Metropolitan (PLA, Jodhpur), being Public
Utility Services Case No. 84/2019, titled “Shekhar Bissa versus
Commissioner, JDA”, praying that a new plot in Ramraj Nagar, i.e.,
at a location different from the original one, be allotted to him on
the ground that the plot allotted by the JDA in Rajeev Gandhi
Nagar Awasiya Yojana was not suitable for habitation.
The application filed before the PLA, Jodhpur was contested by the
JDA on the ground that the respondent had approached the PLA
after a delay of more than seven years from the date of allotment
of Plot No. A-415 in his favour. It was submitted that a pathway
was very much in existence and the plot allotted to the
respondent was suitable for residential purposes. It was further
contended that the respondent could not claim allotment of an
alternative plot in a particular residential colony, namely Ramraj
Nagar.
The JDA further stated that it had taken a policy decision that the
vacant plots in the Ramraj Nagar Scheme would be allotted to
advocates only. It was submitted that, if the respondent gave his
(Uploaded on 05/03/2026 at 03:46:30 PM)
(Downloaded on 05/03/2026 at 08:56:48 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:9473] (3 of 6) [CW-9202/2020]
consent, his case could be considered for allotment of an
alternative plot in Arna Vihar Yojana.
4. The PLA, Jodhpur, after hearing the parties, vide its
impugned award dated 06.01.2020, directed the JDA, Jodhpur to
replace Plot No. A-415 allotted to the respondent in Rajeev Gandhi
Nagar Awasiya Yojana with a vacant plot of the same size in
Ramraj Nagar Yojana.
5. Learned counsel for the JDA, Jodhpur submitted that though
it is true that the Department, upon receiving representations
from the respondent against allotment of Plot No. A-415 on
various grounds, considered his grievances and offered him an
alternative plot in Arna Vihar Yojana, the respondent insisted that
he be allotted a vacant plot in Ramraj Nagar Yojana only.
Learned counsel submitted that the PLA, while passing the
impugned award in favour of the respondent, failed to appreciate
that the JDA, Jodhpur had launched Ramraj Nagar Yojana
specifically for allotment of plots by way of draw of lots in favour
of advocates only. In other words, all plots in Ramraj Nagar Yojana
were reserved for advocates.
6. It was further submitted that when the JDA initiated
proceedings for conducting an e-auction of vacant plots in Ramraj
Nagar Yojana for the general public, the Rajasthan High Court
Advocates Association, Jodhpur filed D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.
13076/2020 before the Hon’ble Division Bench contending that all
plots in Ramraj Nagar Yojana – I & II had been reserved
exclusively for advocates and could not be allotted to any other
person. It was submitted that on 05.01.2023, when the matter
was heard by the Hon’ble Division Bench, a statement was made
(Uploaded on 05/03/2026 at 03:46:30 PM)
(Downloaded on 05/03/2026 at 08:56:48 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:9473] (4 of 6) [CW-9202/2020]
by counsel appearing for the JDA that the vacant plots in Ramraj
Nagar Yojana were to be allotted to advocates only as per the
agreement arrived at between the Rajasthan High Court
Advocates Association, the State Government, and the JDA.
Learned counsel further submitted that the PLA, Jodhpur could not
compel the JDA to allot an alternative plot to the respondent in a
particular scheme after seven years from the date of original
allotment, merely at the request of the respondent. On these
grounds, learned counsel implored the Court to allow the present
writ petition and set aside the impugned award dated 06.01.2020
passed by the PLA, Jodhpur in Public Utility Services Case No.
84/2019.
7. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent vehemently
submitted that the material available on record clearly indicates
that the plot allotted to the respondent in Rajeev Gandhi Nagar
Awasiya Yojana was not suitable for habitation. It was submitted
that Plot No. A-415 was neither properly demarcated nor was
there proper access to the said plot. Soon after allotment, the
respondent submitted representations to the JDA seeking
allotment of an alternative plot. The JDA, after examining the
representations, found the grievances to be genuine and agreed to
allot an alternative plot.
8. Learned counsel submitted that once the JDA had agreed to
replace Plot No. A-415 with an alternative plot, there was no
justification for refusing to allot a vacant plot out of Plot Nos. 331,
332, 334, 337, 340, 341 and 342 available in Ramraj Nagar
Yojana to the respondent. It was further submitted that the
learned Permanent Lok Adalat, after meticulously examining the
(Uploaded on 05/03/2026 at 03:46:30 PM)
(Downloaded on 05/03/2026 at 08:56:48 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:9473] (5 of 6) [CW-9202/2020]
entire material on record, passed a well-reasoned award directing
the JDA to allot a vacant plot in Ramraj Nagar Yojana to the
respondent.
9. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
10. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
material available on record, this Court finds that the JDA had
raised a specific plea before the PLA that Ramraj Nagar Yojana had
been introduced specifically for allotment of plots to advocates and
that the plots in Ramraj Nagar Yojana – I & II were reserved
exclusively for advocates.
11. It is pertinent to mention that though learned counsel for the
respondent requested this Court not to interfere with the
impugned award dated 06.01.2020, she was unable to refute the
fact that in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13076/2020 pending before
the Hon’ble Division Bench, it had been recorded that the plots in
the aforesaid residential schemes were to be allotted exclusively
to advocates as per the agreement between the Rajasthan High
Court Advocates Association, the State Government, and the JDA.
12. Even otherwise, in the opinion of this Court, residential plots
are allotted by the JDA as per the policies framed from time to
time. Policy/Administrative decisions are not open to judicial
interference unless they suffer from arbitrariness, mala fides, or
discrimination. The respondent challenged the allotment of the
plot made in his favour before the PLA after a lapse of more than
seven years, and that too after having the plot registered in his
name.
13. Once the JDA, after considering the grievances of the
respondent regarding allotment of Plot No. A-415 in Rajeev
(Uploaded on 05/03/2026 at 03:46:30 PM)
(Downloaded on 05/03/2026 at 08:56:48 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:9473] (6 of 6) [CW-9202/2020]
Gandhi Nagar Awasiya Yojana, offered him an alternative plot in
Arna Vihar Yojana, such decision ought not to have been
interfered with by the PLA by directing allotment of a plot in
another residential scheme, unless it was established that the
decision of the JDA not to allot a plot in Ramraj Nagar Yojana
suffered from mala fides or arbitrariness.
14. In view of the aforesaid, the present writ petition is allowed
and the impugned award dated 06.01.2020 passed by the PLA,
Jodhpur in Public Utility Services Case No. 84/2019 is hereby
quashed and set aside.
15. However, this order shall not preclude the respondent from
seeking allotment of an alternative plot in Arna Vihar Yojana, as
offered by the JDA vide communication dated 03.07.2018, if so
desired, subject to availability of a plot in the said scheme and in
accordance with the prevailing policy of the JDA for allotment of
residential plots.
16. Stay petition as well as all pending application, if any, stand
disposed of.
(KULDEEP MATHUR),J
Dinesh/-
(Uploaded on 05/03/2026 at 03:46:30 PM)
(Downloaded on 05/03/2026 at 08:56:48 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)