1. The issue involved in the present matters has been considered and decided by a Division Bench of this Court at Principal Seat at Jodhpur in a batch of writ petitions, lead matter being D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17993/2019, Jai Singh v. The State of Rajasthan vide judgment dated 13.12.2019, the operative portion whereof reads as under:—
71. In view of the aforesaid observations, while dismissing all the issues pertaining to non-consideration of representations/non-consideration of recommendations/changes made in recommendations/changes made by the Sub Committee/changes not considered by the Sub Committee/not considered in the proposals/not considered by the District Collectors are held to be not maintainable, as this Court draws a strict line while adhering to the precedent laws of State of U.P. v. Pradhan Sangh Kshettra Samiti (supra) and Bhupendra Pratap Singh Rathore v. State of Rajasthan (supra). This Court is conscious that it cannot cross the golden line, which reflects the mandate of the Constitution of India itself, as laid down under Article 243-O. Thus, the petitions are dismissed as far as the pre-proceedings to the notification dated 15/16.11.2019 are concerned. However, at the same time, this Court is of the considered opinion that such golden line prescribed by the Constitution of India read with Section 101 of the Act of 1994 cannot be crossed by the State as it will amount to abuse of process of law, as the delimitation exercise cannot be an ever continuing exercise, and the same has to be completed in one procedure, spanning between the initial notice which in this case was dated 12.06.2019 to the final notification which was 15/16.11.2019 and has to be brought to an end then and there. It cannot be an ever continuing exercise, as it shall jeopardize the sanctity of the mandate of the Constitution, and thus, all the notifications subsequent to the notification dated 15/16.11.2019, pertaining to the issue in question, stand quashed and set aside, except for the notifications which are purely rectifying the typographical errors.
72. All the cases stand disposed of accordingly. All pending applications also stand disposed of.”
2. In that view of the matter, the present writ petitions are disposed of in the same terms, as in the case of Jai Singh (supra).
Comments