RAJESH SINGH SISODIA vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN

[2026:RJ-JP:30365-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
AT JODHPUR
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 20835/2025
CNR: RJHC010992592025
URN: CW / 37151U / 2025
1. Rajesh Singh Sisodia S/o Bheru Singh Sisodia, Aged
About 45 Years, R/o 77, Near Of Oswal Marble, Kawa
Kheda, Bhilwara, Rajasthan, 311001
2. Pankaj Garg S/o Prem Kisan Garg, Aged About 54 Years,
R/o Near Chitor Walo Ki Haveli, Sham Ki Subji Mandi
Road, Bhupal Ganj, Bhilwara Rajasthan 311001
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Chief Secretary, Rajasthan,
Government. Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. The Secretary, Social Justice And Empowerment
Department, Rajasthan, Government. Ambedkar Bhavan,
Parivahan Marg Jaipur Rajasthan.
3. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Local Self
Department, Rajasthan, Government. Rajmahal
Residential Area C-Scheme, Civil Lines, Jaipur Rajasthan.
4. Director, Local Self Department, Rajasthan, Government,
Near Jlm Hospital, Near Aajad Park, Near Fayar Station,
Ajmer, Rajasthan.
5. Deputy Director (Regional), Local Self, Department, Near
Jlm Hospital, Near Aajad Park, Near Fayar Station, Ajmer,
Rajasthan.
6. The District Collector, Bhilwara, Rajasthan.
7. The Commissioner, Nagar Parishad, Bhilwara.
8. Rakesh Pathak, Chairman, Nagar Parishad, Bhilwara.
9. Alka Pathak W/o Rakesh Pathak, 2/09 Shiv Krapaa,
Aamliyo Ki Baari, Kalki Pura, Manikya Nagar, Rathi Bartan
Wali Gali 311001.
10. Mratyunjay Pathak S/o Rakesh Pathak, 2/09 Shiv Krapaa,
Aamliyo Ki Baari, Kalki Pura, Manikya Nagar, Rathi Bartan
Wali Gali 311001.
----Respondents
(Uploaded on 13/07/2026 at 03:53:59 PM)
(Downloaded on 01/08/2026 at 12:10:33 AM)

(2 of 26)
[2026:RJ-JP:30365-DB] [CW-20835/2025]
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Gaurav Shrimali.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajesh Panwar, Sr. Adv. assisted
by Mr. Ayush Gehlot.
Dr. Praveen Khandelwal, AAG with
Mr. Devesh Mehra.
Dr. Sachin Acharya, Sr. Adv. assisted
by Mr. Chayan Bothra.
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR
J U D G M E N T
Reportable
07/07/2026
“History does not merely narrate the past; it often explains
the inequalities of the present.”
1. The present Public Interest Litigation presents an occasion
for this Court to examine an issue that extends beyond the legality
of individual transactions concerning immovable property. At its
core lies the constitutional obligation of the State to secure
justice, dignity and meaningful rehabilitation for communities that
have endured generations of social exclusion and historical
disadvantage. The controversy invites this Court to consider
whether a welfare measure conceived to provide permanent
settlement and social security to members of a Denotified,
Nomadic and Semi-Nomadic community can subsequently be
interpreted or administered in a manner that permits the erosion
of its very object. The resolution of the present dispute, therefore,
necessitates an examination not merely of the statutory and
administrative framework governing the scheme in question, but
(Uploaded on 13/07/2026 at 03:53:59 PM)
(Downloaded on 01/08/2026 at 12:10:33 AM)

(3 of 26)
[2026:RJ-JP:30365-DB] [CW-20835/2025]
also of the constitutional commitment to social justice, substantive
equality and the protection of vulnerable communities, which
forms one of the defining features of the constitutional vision
adopted by the framers of our Constitution.
2. India has, since time immemorial, been home to several
Nomadic and Semi-Nomadic communities whose traditional
occupations formed an integral part of the country's social and
economic life. These communities traversed villages and towns as
blacksmiths, artisans, pastoralists, entertainers, traders and
craftsmen, providing indispensable services to settled populations.
Their mobility was not a manifestation of lawlessness, but a
recognised mode of livelihood, sustained by custom, necessity and
economic interdependence.
2.1. The Gadia Lohars constitute one of India's traditional
Nomadic and Semi-Nomadic artisan communities, historically
associated with blacksmithing and the manufacture and repair of
agricultural implements, household tools and other articles of daily
utility. Originating from the region of present-day Rajasthan, they
traversed villages and towns across northern India in their
distinctive bullock carts, locally known as gadi , which served not
merely as a means of transportation but also as their homes. Their
mobility was intrinsically linked to their traditional occupation,
enabling them to provide indispensable services to rural
communities whose agrarian economy depended substantially
upon their craftsmanship. The gadi , over time, came to symbolize
(Uploaded on 13/07/2026 at 03:53:59 PM)
(Downloaded on 01/08/2026 at 12:10:33 AM)

(4 of 26)
[2026:RJ-JP:30365-DB] [CW-20835/2025]
not merely a mode of travel but the identity, livelihood and
cultural heritage of the community itself.
2.2. The historical trajectory of the Gadia Lohars, however,
underwent a profound transformation during the colonial era. The
British administration, guided by a policy of surveillance and
administrative control, increasingly viewed the itinerant existence
of several Nomadic and Semi-Nomadic communities with
suspicion. Their mobility, which had for centuries constituted an
essential attribute of their traditional occupation and livelihood,
came to be perceived as a threat to public order rather than as a
legitimate socio-economic practice. This colonial approach
culminated in the enactment of the Criminal Tribes Act, 1871 , a
legislation which, by criminalising communities on the basis of
birth and ancestry rather than individual conduct, represents one
of the most oppressive manifestations of colonial rule in India.
2.3. The Criminal Tribes Act, 1871 proceeded on the
fundamentally erroneous premise that criminality could be
hereditary. It empowered the colonial administration to notify
entire tribes and communities as "Criminal Tribes", not because of
any proven criminal act committed by an individual, but solely by
reason of birth and community affiliation. Consequently,
thousands of persons belonging to such communities were
subjected to compulsory registration, constant police surveillance,
restrictions on movement, compulsory reporting before the
authorities, confinement within notified settlements and numerous
other civil disabilities. In doing so, the legislation abandoned one
(Uploaded on 13/07/2026 at 03:53:59 PM)
(Downloaded on 01/08/2026 at 12:10:33 AM)

(5 of 26)
[2026:RJ-JP:30365-DB] [CW-20835/2025]
of the most fundamental principles of criminal jurisprudence that
criminal liability is personal and must arise from individual
conduct, and not from ancestry or community affiliation and
substituted it with a presumption of inherited criminality. Such a
legal regime not only deprived generations of their civil liberties
but also institutionalized a social stigma that continued to endure
long after the colonial regime itself had ceased to exist.
2.4. It was only with the advent of Independence that India
consciously repudiated this colonial philosophy. The Constitution
marked a decisive departure from a legal order founded upon
suspicion and discrimination, affirming instead the values of
liberty, equality, dignity and the rule of law. In furtherance of
these constitutional ideals, the Criminal Tribes Act, 1871 came to
be repealed by the Criminal Tribes Laws (Repeal) Act, 1952,
resulting in the denotification of the communities that had hitherto
been branded as "Criminal Tribes". The repeal of the legislation
was not merely a statutory exercise; it constituted a constitutional
affirmation that no individual or community could be subjected to
legal disabilities or social stigma merely by reason of birth or
ancestry.
2.5. The repeal of the Criminal Tribes Act, however, did not, by
itself, erase the enduring consequences of decades of institutional
discrimination. While the legal stigma attached to these
communities was formally removed, its social, economic and
psychological manifestations continued to persist. Many
Denotified, Nomadic and Semi-Nomadic Tribes remained on the
(Uploaded on 13/07/2026 at 03:53:59 PM)
(Downloaded on 01/08/2026 at 12:10:33 AM)

(6 of 26)
[2026:RJ-JP:30365-DB] [CW-20835/2025]
margins of society, grappling with homelessness, insecure
livelihoods, limited access to education and healthcare, economic
deprivation, and persistent social prejudice. The burden of
historical injustice, accumulated over generations, could not be
dismantled merely by legislative repeal; it demanded sustained
constitutional commitment and affirmative State intervention
directed towards their rehabilitation, social integration and
restoration of dignity.
3. The Constitution of India was conceived not merely as a
charter of political governance but as an instrument of profound
social transformation. The framers, acutely conscious of the
historical inequalities and entrenched social hierarchies that
characterized Indian society, envisaged a constitutional order
founded upon the ideals of justice, liberty, equality and fraternity,
as embodied in the Preamble. These constitutional promises are
not abstract aspirations but enforceable values that permeate the
guarantees contained in Part III and the Directive Principles
embodied in Part IV of the Constitution. Articles 14 and 21, read
harmoniously with Articles 38, 39(b) and 46, cast an affirmative
obligation upon the State not merely to refrain from
discrimination, but to adopt measures that dismantle historical
disadvantage, secure substantive equality, and ensure that
vulnerable communities are able to live with dignity and
participate meaningfully in the social and economic life of the
nation.
(Uploaded on 13/07/2026 at 03:53:59 PM)
(Downloaded on 01/08/2026 at 12:10:34 AM)

(7 of 26)
[2026:RJ-JP:30365-DB] [CW-20835/2025]
3.1. The Preamble embodies the constitutional conscience of the
Republic. Its solemn resolve to secure to all citizens Justice-social,
economic and political, Equality of status and opportunity, and to
promote Fraternity assuring the dignity of the individual, assumes
particular significance while examining the rights of communities
that have remained victims of historical discrimination and social
exclusion. The constitutional promise of social justice is not
fulfilled merely by the formal removal of legal disabilities; it
requires the creation of conditions in which historically
disadvantaged communities are able to realize the guarantees of
equality, dignity and meaningful participation in the life of the
nation.
3.2. The guarantees contained in Part III are not merely negative
injunctions against arbitrary State action but affirmative
assurances intended to secure meaningful equality for all citizens.
The guarantee of equality under Article 14 is not confined to
formal equality but extends to substantive equality, recognizing
the need to redress historical disadvantages suffered by
vulnerable communities. Equally, Article 21, as expansively
interpreted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, encompasses the right
to live with dignity, including access to shelter, livelihood and
conditions necessary for a meaningful existence. Read together,
these guarantees obligate the State not merely to refrain from
discrimination but to actively create conditions in which
communities that have historically endured exclusion and
(Uploaded on 13/07/2026 at 03:53:59 PM)
(Downloaded on 01/08/2026 at 12:10:34 AM)

(8 of 26)
[2026:RJ-JP:30365-DB] [CW-20835/2025]
marginalization may realize the constitutional promise of equal
citizenship.
3.3. The vision embodied in Part III is reinforced by the Directive
Principles of State Policy contained in Part IV of the Constitution,
which serve as the guiding principles for governance in a welfare
State. Articles 38 and 39 require the State to promote a social
order informed by justice and to ensure that the material
resources of the community are distributed so as to subserve the
common good, while Article 46 mandates the State to promote,
with special care, the educational and economic interests of the
weaker sections and to protect them from social injustice and
exploitation. Welfare measures designed for the rehabilitation of
Denotified, Nomadic and Semi-Nomadic communities are,
therefore, not matters of executive generosity or governmental
largesse; they are constitutional instruments through which the
State seeks to fulfill its obligation of securing substantive equality,
restoring dignity and remedying the enduring consequences of
historical injustice.
4. The constitutional vision of social justice is further reinforced
by the evolving corpus of international human rights law. The
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948, proclaims that all
human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights and
recognizes the right to an adequate standard of living, including
housing and social security. The International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights, 1966, affirms equality before the law and
protection against discrimination, while the International Covenant
(Uploaded on 13/07/2026 at 03:53:59 PM)
(Downloaded on 01/08/2026 at 12:10:34 AM)

(9 of 26)
[2026:RJ-JP:30365-DB] [CW-20835/2025]
on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 1966, recognizes
adequate housing as an essential component of human dignity.
These universally accepted principles lend further support to an
interpretation of the Constitution that seeks not merely to remove
historical disabilities, but to secure effective rehabilitation, social
inclusion and substantive equality for communities that have long
remained on the margins of society.
5. It is in furtherance of these constitutional and international
commitments that the State has, from time to time, introduced
welfare measures aimed at the rehabilitation of Denotified,
Nomadic and Semi-Nomadic communities. Such measures are not
conceived as acts of charity or executive benevolence, but as
affirmative interventions intended to undo the enduring
consequences of historical injustice, facilitate social integration,
and secure to these communities the dignity, stability and equal
citizenship promised by the Constitution. Schemes providing
permanent habitation and security of tenure constitute an integral
component of this constitutional endeavour, for without a secure
dwelling, the guarantees of equality, education, livelihood and
human dignity remain largely illusory. It is one such welfare
measure that falls for consideration before this Court in the
present proceedings.
6. The present Public Interest Litigation arises out of a welfare
scheme formulated by the State with the avowed objective of
providing stability, rehabilitation and social security to vulnerable
sections belonging to the Nomadic and Semi-Nomadic
(Uploaded on 13/07/2026 at 03:53:59 PM)
(Downloaded on 01/08/2026 at 12:10:34 AM)

(10 of 26)
[2026:RJ-JP:30365-DB] [CW-20835/2025]
communities. In furtherance of this constitutional objective, the
respondents-State introduced the Keer Kheda Gadia Lohar Yojana,
under which about 184 residential plots were allotted, in or around
the year 2005, to eligible members of the Gadia Lohar community.
The allotments were made free of cost on a long-term leasehold
basis for a period of ninety-nine years, subject to conditions
including a restriction on alienation and transfer. These conditions
were not merely contractual stipulations but were intended to
preserve the constitutional and welfare objectives underlying the
Scheme by ensuring residential stability and preventing the
diversion of the benefits meant exclusively for the intended
beneficiaries.
7. The restriction on alienation embodied in the Scheme was
neither incidental nor arbitrary. It constituted the very foundation
of the welfare measure. The object of the Scheme was not merely
to confer title over immovable property but to secure permanent
rehabilitation of a historically disadvantaged community by
ensuring that the benefits of the allotment remained available to
the intended beneficiaries and their community. The condition
prohibiting transfer was, therefore, conceived as a protective
mechanism to insulate the beneficiaries from economic
exploitation and to prevent public resources, distributed as an
instrument of social justice, from ultimately passing into the hands
of persons for whom the Scheme was never intended.
8. The controversy in the present proceedings arises from the
allegation that the very safeguards incorporated to preserve the
(Uploaded on 13/07/2026 at 03:53:59 PM)
(Downloaded on 01/08/2026 at 12:10:34 AM)

(11 of 26)
[2026:RJ-JP:30365-DB] [CW-20835/2025]
constitutional object of the Scheme have been diluted through
subsequent administrative action, resulting in transfers of plots
originally reserved for members of the Gadia Lohar community in
favour of persons outside the beneficiary class.
9. Mr. Gaurav Shrimali, learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the petitioner, submits that on one side, such noble measures
were put in place, and on the other side, certain persons,
including elected representatives and authorities of Nagar Nigam,
have committed grave irregularities under the garb of amended
rules, whereby plots reserved for the deprived, nomadic and semi-
nomadic Gadia Lohar Community have been transferred in favour
of relatives and other affluent persons, thereby undermining the
very purpose of the scheme.
9.1 Learned counsel pointed out that the authorities passed an
order dated 21.04.2022, granting relaxation to permit transfer of
ownership of such reserved land allotted under the aforesaid
scheme. A copy of the order dated 21.04.2022, produced by the
respondents-State in their reply, is reproduced below, particularly
paragraph 2 thereof:
^^ 2- fudk;ksa dh ;kstukvksa ¼vgLrkUrfjr Hkw[k.Mksa½ ds laca/k esa%&
vkfFkZd n`f"V ls detksj vk; oxZ gsrq vkoafVr Hkw[k.Mksa ,oa iquZokl ds
Hkw[k.Mksa rFkk iwoZ esa dqN ;kstukvksa esa vkoklh; Hkw[k.M v&gLrkUrj.k dh
'krZ ij vkoafVr fd;s x;s Fks ftudk iathd`r foØ; i=ksa ds vk/kkj ij Qzh
gksYM iV~Vs dh ekax dh tk jgh gSA vr% ,sls Hkw[k.Mksa esa v&gLrkUrj.kh;
dh 'krZ dh foyksfir djrs gq, uke gLrkarj.k dh NwV vfHk;ku vof/k esa
iznku dh tkrh gSA
(Uploaded on 13/07/2026 at 03:53:59 PM)
(Downloaded on 01/08/2026 at 12:10:34 AM)

(12 of 26)
[2026:RJ-JP:30365-DB] [CW-20835/2025]
9.2 Thereafter, learned counsel drew the attention of this Court
to Annexure R/3 of the reply, being a letter of the Additional
Director, which reads as under:
^^vk;qDr]
uxj fuxe]
HkhyokMkA
fo"k;% iz’kklu 'kgjksa ds lax vfHk;ku&2021 esa vfHk;ku vof/k esa
jkT; ljdkj }kjk tkjh vkns’k fnukad 21-04-2022 esa vgLrkUrj.kh; iV~Vksa
ds laca/k esa tkjh vkns’k ds Øe esa ekxZn’kZu ckcrA
izlax% vkidk i= Øekad 4996 fnukad 26-06-2025 ds Øe esaA
mi;qZDr fo"k;kUrxZr izklafxd i= ds Øe esa ys[k gS fd xkfM+;k
ywgkjksa ls ftu O;fDr;ksa us iathd`r foØ; i= ls Hkw[k.M Ø; dj viuk
uke ukekUrj.k jkT; ljdkj ds vkns’k fnukad 21-04-2022 dh 'krZ la[;k
2 ds vuqlkj vius i{k eas djok fy;k gS muds }kjk vU; O;fDr;ksa dks
Hkw[k.M foØ; djus ij uke gLrkUrj.k djus ij dksbZ izfrca/k ugha gSA
vfrfjDr funs’kd^^
9.3 Learned counsel further submits that the very purpose of the
welfare scheme was to eradicate the social evil afflicting the
nomadic and semi-nomadic class of the population by according
them stability and welfare in the form of housing and allied
measures. Learned counsel for the petitioner has thereafter, taken
this Court to Annexure 11, wherein he has furnished a list of
several plots, which according to him, belong to family members
of respondent No.7.
9.4 Learned counsel has also drawn the attention of this Court to
a letter dated 30.07.2025, dealing with a complaint regarding the
Gadia Lohar Welfare Scheme, which is reproduced hereunder:
^^lgk;d funs’kd ¼lrdZrk½]
Lok;Rr 'kklu foHkkx]
jktLFkku] t;iqjA
(Uploaded on 13/07/2026 at 03:53:59 PM)
(Downloaded on 01/08/2026 at 12:10:34 AM)

(13 of 26)
[2026:RJ-JP:30365-DB] [CW-20835/2025]
fo"k;% fof/k fo:) dk;Z djus dh tkap djokbZ tkdj nks"kh
vf/kdkfj;ksa@deZpkfj;ksa ds fo:) dk;Zokgh fd, tkus ckcrA
lanHkZ%& vkids i= Øekad i-2¼d½ ¼ ½
lh,evks@tkap@Mh,ych@2025@ 3067 fnukad 13-06-2025 ds Øe esaA
mijksDr fo"k;kUrxZr ys[k gS fd izkFkhZ Jh jkts’k flag fllksfn;k]
ik"kZn okMZ ua-25 uxj ifj"kn HkhyokMk }kjk izLrqr f’kdk;r ds laca/k esa
vk;qDr] uxj fuxe HkhyokMk ds i= Øekad u-fu-Hkh-
@jktLo@2025&26@5757 fnukad 10-07-2025 }kjk miyC/k djok;s x;s
rF;ksa ,oa nLrkostksa ds vk/kkj ij tkap fjiksVZ bl izdkj gS%&
1- izdj.k esa izkIr f’kdk;r vuqlkj dhj[ksMk ckykth jksM] HkhyokMk esa ?
kqeUrq ifjokjksa dks fu’kqYd vkoafVr Hkwfe dk voS/k cSpku dj ukekUrj.k dh
dk;Zokgh ij jksd yxkdj mDr vkoafVr Hkw[k.Mksa uxj fuxe] HkhyokMk eas
fufgr djokus ls lacaf/kr gSA
2- izdj.k esa vk;qDr] uxj fuxe] HkhyokMk ls izkIr fjiksVZ vuqlkj jktLo
'kk[kk }kjk iz’kklu 'kgjksa ds lax vfHk;ku& 2021 dh vfHk;ku vof/k esa
xkfM+;k yqgkj ifjokjksa dks vkoafVr Hkw[k.Mksa ds ukekUrj.k vkns’k tkjh fd;s
x;s FksA ftlesa izHkkjh vf/kdkjh ¼jktLo½ }kjk izLrqr fjiksVZ vuqlkj xkfM+;k
yqgkj ;kstuk esa uxj ifj"kn }kjk o"kZ 2005 esa 184 xkfM+;k yqgkj ifjokjksa
x
dks 99 o"kZ yht ij vgLrkUrj.kh; dh 'krZ ij 18 QhV 25 QhV ds
Hkw[k.M fu’kqYd vkoafVr fd;s x;s FksA mDr tkjh fu’kqYd vkoaVu i= esa
of.kZr 'krksZa ds vuqlkj mDr vkoaVu vkosndksa ds jktLFkku esa dksbZ
Hkw[k.M@edku ugha gksuk ,oa 02 o"kksZa esa vkoafVr Hkw[k.M ij Hkou fuekZ.k
Lohd`fr ysdj fuekZ.k djokus dh 'krZ ij vkoafVr fd;k x;k FkkA mDr
fu’kqYd vkoaVu i= esa of.kZr 'krZ ds vuqlkj mijksDr 'krksZa dk mYya?ku
djus ij@feF;k rF;ksa ds vk/kkj ij xyr vkoaVu djokus ij mDr
Hkw[k.M Lor% uxj ifj"kn HkhyokMk ¼uxj fuxe HkhyokMk½ eas fufgr gks
tk;sxkA
3- izdj.k esa vk;qDr] uxj fuxe] HkhyokM+k ls izkIr fjiksVZ vuqlkj
Hkw[k.M/kkjh xkfM+;k yqgkj ifjokjksa }kjk vU;= O;fDr;ksa dks mijksDr
fu’kqYd vkoafVr Hkw[k.M jftLVMZ foØ; dj fn;s rFkk jftLVªkj
dk;kZy; }kjk mDr Hkw[k.Mksa ds iathd`r foØ; i= tkjh dj fn;s x;sA
rRi’pkr~ iathd`r foØ; i=ksa ds vk/kkj ij mDr Hkw[k.Mksa ds Øsrkvksa }kjk
iz’kklu 'kgjksa ds lax vfHk;ku&2021 esa uxj ifj"kn HkhyokMk esa
ukekUrj.k gsrq vkWuykbZu uke gLrkUrj.k i=kofy;ka izsf"kr dh xbZA uxj
fuxe] HkhyokMk ds izHkkjh vf/kdkjh ¼jktLo½ }kjk mDr vkWuykbZu
i=kofy;ksa ij lgk;d fof/k ijke’khZ] ftyk dyDVj dk;kZy;] HkhyokMk
(Uploaded on 13/07/2026 at 03:53:59 PM)
(Downloaded on 01/08/2026 at 12:10:34 AM)

(14 of 26)
[2026:RJ-JP:30365-DB] [CW-20835/2025]
¼vfr- dk;ZHkkj uxj fuxe] HkhyokMk½ ls fof/kd jk; ,oa jkT; ljdkj }kjk
iz’kklu 'kgjksa ds lax vfHk;ku& 2021 esa vfHk;ku vof/k esa vkns’k fnukad
21-04-2022 ds fcUnw la[;k 02 ds vk/kkj ij ukekUrj.k fd;s tkus ds laca/k
esa voxr djok;k x;k gSA i=koyh esa lgk;d fof/k ijke’khZ dh
fVIi.kh ,oa mDr vkns’k fnukad 21-04-2022 ds fcUnw la[;k 02 esa xkfM+;k
yqgkjksa dks vkoklh; ;kstuk cukdj uxj ikfydk vf/kfu;e& 1959 ,oa
jktLFkku 'kgjh Hkwfe fuLrkj.k fu;e&1974 ds vuqlkj 99 o"khZ; yht ij
fu’kqYd vkoafVr Hkwfe dks gLrkukUrj.k fd;s tkus dk mYys[k ugha gSA
izHkkjh vf/kdkjh ¼jktLo½ }kjk fof/kd fjiksVZ o jkT; ljdkj ds mijksDr
vkns’k dh xyr O;k[;k dj ukekUrj.k vkns’k Øsrkvksa ds uke vfHk;ku
vof/k esa tkjh fd;k tkuk izrhr gksrk gSA
vk;qDr uxj fuxe HkhyokMk }kjk miyC/k nLrkostksa vuqlkj
xkfM+;k yqgkjksa dks vkoklh; ;kstuk cukdj uxj ikfydk
vf/kfu;e&1959 ,oa jktLFkku 'kgjh Hkwfe fuLrkj.k fu;e& 1974 ds
vuqlkj 99 o"khZ; yht ij tkjh fu’kqYd vkoaVu i= esa of.kZr 'krksZa vuqlkj
mDr vkoaVu vkosndksa ds jktLFkku esa dksbZ Hkw[k.M@edku ugha gksuk ,oa
02 o"kksZa esa vkoafVr Hkw[k.M ij Hkou fuekZ.k Lohd`fr ysdj fuekZ.k djokus
dh 'krZ ij vkoafVr fd;k x;k FkkA mDr fu’kqYd vkoaVu i= esa of.kZr
'krZ ds vuqlkj vkoafVr Hkw[k.M vU; dks foØ;@[email protected] lnSo
izfrcaf/kr jgsxk ,oa 'krZ 04 vuqlkj mijksDr 'krksZa dks mYya?ku djus
ij@feF;k rF;ksa ds vk/kkj ij xyr vkoaVu djokus ij mDr Hkw[k.M Lor
% ifj"kn eas fufgr gks tk,xkA mDr vkoafVr Hkwfe dk vU; dks
foØ;@[email protected] ij 'krZ 04 ds laca/k esa vk;qDr] uxj fuxe]
HkhyokMk ls izkIr fjiksVZ vuqlkj dksbZ dk;Zokgh ugha fd;k tkuk izrhr gksrk
gSA lkFk gh jkT; ljdkj ds vkns’kksa dh xyr O;k[;k dj ukekUrj.k tkjh
fd;k x;k gSA izdj.k esa fu;eksa dh xyr O;k[;k dh tkdj dk;Z eas
vfu;ferrk fd;k tkuk fl) gksrk gSA
vr% vk;qDr] uxj fuxe] HkhyokMk }kjk miyC/k djok;s x;s
rF;ksa ,oa nLrkostksa ds vk/kkj ij izdj.k dh oLrqfLFkfr tkap fjiksVZ izsf"kr
gSA
layXu%& mijksDrkuqlkj
,lMh@&
mifuns’kd ¼{ks=h;½
9.5 Learned counsel has pressed his prayers for cancellation of
the allotment, sale and purchase in favour of the family members
(Uploaded on 13/07/2026 at 03:53:59 PM)
(Downloaded on 01/08/2026 at 12:10:34 AM)

(15 of 26)
[2026:RJ-JP:30365-DB] [CW-20835/2025]
of respondent No.7, and for restoration of the plots in the name of
the Municipal Council/State. Learned counsel also seeks an inquiry
into, and appropriate action against, the persons and authorities
concerned.
10. Per contra , Mr. Rajesh Panwar, learned Senior Counsel and
Additional Advocate General, assisted by Mr. Ayush Gehlot,
appearing on behalf of the respondents-State, fairly submits that
the State has a policy to support the semi-nomadic and nomadic
communities and to undertake welfare measures to eradicate the
social evil of instability afflicting such citizens, and that the State
has, from time to time, introduced schemes for the free allotment
of land to such deprived persons with a view to affording them
basic stability in housing and dwelling.
10.1 Mr. Panwar further submits that the respondents-State are
ready to inquire into whether any irregularity has been committed
in the sale and transfer of plots reserved for the nomadic Gadia
Lohar community. He also submits that the original allotment
orders required the allottees not to alienate the plots for a period
of 20 years.
11. Dr. Sachin Acharya, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Mr.
Chayan Bothra, appearing for respondents No.8 to 10, has
vehemently opposed the allegation that their family members
were involved in the sale of plots reserved for the Gadia Lohar
community. He submits that the allegations are the result of
personal vendetta pursued by the petitioner, who is himself a
Councillor (Parshad) and shares political rivalry with respondents
(Uploaded on 13/07/2026 at 03:53:59 PM)
(Downloaded on 01/08/2026 at 12:10:34 AM)

(16 of 26)
[2026:RJ-JP:30365-DB] [CW-20835/2025]
No.8 to 10, and that the petitioner has accordingly levelled bald
and unsubstantiated allegations, which are open to scrutiny by the
State Government, so that respondents No.8 to 10 are not
unnecessarily dragged into the controversy. He further submits
that the Mayor has admitted that six plots stand allotted to his
wife and children, and that the remaining plots belong to
strangers.
12. At this juncture, Mr. Panwar fairly submitted that, should the
allegations levelled by the petitioner require investigation, an
appropriate individual or body shall be constituted to investigate
all 184 plots concerning the conduct of respondent No.7, in order
to ascertain whether any plot has been illegally purchased.
13. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner has further
drawn the attention of this Court to office order dated 07.05.2026,
whereby the State Government has launched a fresh initiative in
the district concerned for identifying nomadic and semi-nomadic
communities for the purpose of issuing them residences and
pattas free of cost, so that their welfare may be taken up. The
operative portion of the office order dated 07.05.2026 is
reproduced hereunder:
^^dk;kZy; vkns’k
Jheku funs’kd ,oa fof’k"V lfpo] Lok;Rr 'kklu foHkkx ds vkns’k
Øekad 2106&17 fnukad 04-05-2026 vuqlkj ekuuh; eq[;ea=h egksn; }kjk
jkt mUufr cSBd esa iznRr funsZ’kksa ds Øe esa ?kqeUrq@v)Z?kqeUrq ifjokjksa dks
vkokl@iV~Vs miyC/k djok;s tkus ds funsZ’k izkIr gq, gSaA funsZ’kksa ds Øe
esa fnukad 12-05-2026 rd 'kgj ds lHkh okMksZa esa vkoklghu ?kqeUrq@v)Z?
kqeUrq ifjokjksa dk losZ djok;k tkuk gSA mDr dk;Z gsrq Jh vk’kh"k yks<k]
lgk;d uxj fu;kstd dks izHkkjh vf/kdkjh fu;qDr fd;k tkrk gSA mDr
(Uploaded on 13/07/2026 at 03:53:59 PM)
(Downloaded on 01/08/2026 at 12:10:34 AM)

(17 of 26)
[2026:RJ-JP:30365-DB] [CW-20835/2025]
dk;Z gsrq fuxe Lrj ij fuEu vf/kdkfj;ksa@deZpkfj;ksa dh Vhe dk xBu
tksuokj fd;k tkrk gSA
tksu okMZ izHkkjh vf/kdkjh tksu lgk0 izHkkjh
tksu , 1] 4] 5] 6] 14] 15] 16] 63] 64] 65] 66] 67]
Jh efgiky <kdk] lgk;d
1- Jh jkes’oj xqtZj] tsbZ,u
68] 69] 70
vfHk;Urk
2- lacaf/kr okMZ ,lvkbZ
3- lacaf/kr okMZ teknkj
tksu ch 2] 3] 7] 8] 9] 10] 11] 12] 13] 17] 18] 19]
Jh gjfoUnz flag] lgk;d
1- Jh euh"k lkaxsyk] ,bZ,u
20] 21] 22] 23
vfHk;Urk
2- lacaf/kr okMZ ,lvkbZ
3- lacaf/kr okMZ teknkj
tksu lh 24] 25] 26] 27] 28] 29] 39] 40] 41] 42]
Jh gjukjk;.k ekyh]
1- Jh jkedj.k 'kekZ] tsbZ,u
43] 44] 45] 46] 47] 48] 51] 52] 53] 54
iz’kklfud vf/kdkjh
2- lacaf/kr okMZ ,lvkbZ
3- lacaf/kr okMZ teknkj
tksu Mh 30] 31] 32] 33] 34] 35] 36] 37] 38] 49]
Jh lqjs’k xxZ] lgk;d
1- Jh jkes’oj xqtZj] tsbZ,u
50] 55] 56] 57] 58] 59] 60] 61] 62
vfHk;Urk
2- lacaf/kr okMZ ,lvkbZ
3- lacaf/kr okMZ teknkj
vr% mijksDr vf/kdkfj;ksa dks funsZf’kr fd;k tkrk gS fd vkoafVr
okMksZa eas ?kqeUrq@ v)?kqeUrq ifjokjksa dk losZ djok;k tkdj fu/kkfjr izi=
esa lwpuk izHkkjh vf/kdkjh dks izfrfnu miyC/k djk;k tkuk lqfuf’pr
djsaxsA
,lMh@&
vk;qDr
uxj fuxe] HkhyokMk
13.1 Learned counsel for the petitioner has also taken this Court
to Section 42 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, which reads as
follows:
“ 42. General restrictions on sale, gift and bequest— The
sale, gift or bequest by a Khatedar tenants of his interest in the
whole or part of his holding shall be void, if —
(a) Omitted.
(b) such sale, gift or bequest is by a number of Scheduled
Caste in favour of a person who is not a member of the
Scheduled Caste, or by a member of a Scheduled Tribe in
favour of a person who in not a member of the Scheduled
Tribe.
[(bb) such sale, gift or bequest, notwithstanding anything
contained in clause (b), is by a member of Saharia
Scheduled Tribe in favour of a person who is not a
member of the said Saharia tribe.]
(Uploaded on 13/07/2026 at 03:53:59 PM)
(Downloaded on 01/08/2026 at 12:10:34 AM)

(18 of 26)
[2026:RJ-JP:30365-DB] [CW-20835/2025]
(c) Omitted.
2142A. Omitted.
2242B. Declaration as valid of sale, gift and bequest—
Where any sale, gift or holding before the commencement of the
Rajasthan Tenancy (Second Amendment) Act, 1992 Act No. 22 of
1992 was void on account of contravention of any of the
provisions of clause (a) of section 42, as it stood before the said
amendment Act of 1992, such sale, gift or bequest may be
declared to be valid by the Collector or any officer or authority
empowered by the State Government in this behalf on an
application made to him or it within such time and in such
manner and on payment of such fee and penalty as may be
prescribed:
Provided that-
(a) - such sale, sift or bequest was otherwise legally valid
and in conformity with the provisions of the laws for the
time being in force except those contained in clause (a) of
section 42 as aforesaid:
(b) the parties to the sale, or bequest comply with all the
terms and conditions as may be prescribed by the rules or
by any special or general order:
(c) the payment is -made of such premium or penalty as
may be prescribed:
(d) the applicant undertakes to pay urban assessment
levied at such rate and in accordance with such manner as
may be prescribed.”
13.2 Learned counsel submits that if, with the passage of time,
any liberty is to be granted to sell or purchase the freely allotted
land, such liberty ought to carry a further restriction confining sale
to within the community itself, so that the very purpose of
upliftment of the nomadic and semi-nomadic Gadia Lohar
community is preserved, even while permitting a limited liberty to
sell.
14. This Court, having heard learned counsel for the parties at
length and having perused the record, finds that the allegations
levelled by the petitioner vide Annexure-11, as supplemented by
(Uploaded on 13/07/2026 at 03:53:59 PM)
(Downloaded on 01/08/2026 at 12:10:34 AM)

(19 of 26)
[2026:RJ-JP:30365-DB] [CW-20835/2025]
the additional affidavit, together with the response of respondents
No.8 to 10, warrant an independent inquiry by the competent
authorities, who shall take appropriate action against every person
found responsible, strictly in accordance with law. Accordingly,
while concluding this limb of the controversy, this Court directs
respondents No.3 and 4 to conduct a comprehensive fact-finding
inquiry through proper authority into the allegations regarding the
illegal purchase of plots belonging to the Gadia Lohar community
by the family members of respondents No.8 to 10, and to proceed
further in accordance with law. The report of such investigation be
placed before this Court within six months from today, and the
matter be listed before the appropriate Regular Bench for perusal
of the report and further action, if required.
15. The second aspect with which this Court is equally concerned
relates to the plots allotted under the welfare scheme known as
the Keer Kheda Gadia Lohar Yojana to the Nomadic and Semi-
Nomadic Gadia Lohar community. Even though the welfare of such
communities continues to remain a matter of priority for the State
Government, no effective steps have been taken to protect and
preserve the plots earlier allotted for their rehabilitation and
general welfare, or to prevent the perpetuation of the social evil of
nomadism and semi-nomadism. Such an approach not only
defeats the very object of the Scheme but also falls short of the
constitutional obligation cast upon the State under Articles 14, 21,
38 and 46 of the Constitution to secure substantive equality,
dignity and meaningful rehabilitation for historically disadvantaged
(Uploaded on 13/07/2026 at 03:53:59 PM)
(Downloaded on 01/08/2026 at 12:10:34 AM)

(20 of 26)
[2026:RJ-JP:30365-DB] [CW-20835/2025]
communities, including Denotified, Nomadic and Semi-Nomadic
Tribes. It equally runs contrary to the constitutional values
reflected in the international human rights principles noticed
hereinabove, which recognize adequate housing, social security
and equal dignity as indispensable facets of human rights.
16. This Court takes note of the fact that, under the Keer Kheda
Gadia Lohar Yojana, 184 plots were allotted to the Gadia Lohar
community, as stated in the reply of the State. This Court also
takes note of the fact that the amendment brought in has been
colorably utilized to permit the sale of such plots, which cannot be
countenanced, as it would undermine the very purpose of
eradicating nomadism and securing permanent rehabilitation,
which the State itself seeks to address. Indeed, the letter dated
07.05.2026, reproduced hereinabove, itself demonstrates that
according permanent residence and stability to Nomadic and
Semi-Nomadic communities continues to remain a matter of
priority for the State. The welfare scheme earlier implemented by
the State cannot, therefore, be watered down in a manner
whereby the entire Gadia Lohar community would suffer, and
hundreds of valuable plots of public property, given to them free
of cost as a measure of constitutional rehabilitation and
restorative justice, would be siphoned off to persons who could
afford to pay a higher price and who were never the true
beneficiaries of the welfare scheme initiated by the State
Government. Such diversion would reduce a constitutional welfare
measure into an ordinary land transaction, thereby frustrating
(Uploaded on 13/07/2026 at 03:53:59 PM)
(Downloaded on 01/08/2026 at 12:10:34 AM)

(21 of 26)
[2026:RJ-JP:30365-DB] [CW-20835/2025]
both the object of the Scheme and the constitutional vision that
inspired it.
17. This Court deprecates any practice on the part of the State
that has the effect of watering down an earlier welfare measure
conceived for the rehabilitation of a historically disadvantaged
community. While continuing to recognize the backwardness of the
Gadia Lohar community and of the Denotified, Nomadic and Semi-
Nomadic communities generally, the State cannot pursue a policy
of rehabilitation on the one hand and permit the erosion of the
very safeguards intended to secure such rehabilitation on the
other. The constitutional guarantee of substantive equality does
not end with the conferment of a benefit; it extends to ensuring
that the benefit continues to serve the very class for whose
advancement it was conceived. The welfare scheme has,
therefore, to be interpreted in accordance with its true object,
namely, that the plots allotted thereunder shall continue to
subserve the rehabilitation of the beneficiary community. The
legislative policy embodied in Section 42 of the Rajasthan Tenancy
Act, 1955, which prohibits the transfer of land by members of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes to persons outside their
respective communities, reflects the broader constitutional
concern of protecting vulnerable communities from economic
exploitation and preventing the alienation of assets intended for
their advancement. Though the said provision may not govern the
present Scheme, the protective philosophy underlying it furnishes
valuable guidance while interpreting a welfare measure intended
(Uploaded on 13/07/2026 at 03:53:59 PM)
(Downloaded on 01/08/2026 at 12:10:34 AM)

(22 of 26)
[2026:RJ-JP:30365-DB] [CW-20835/2025]
for the rehabilitation of a historically marginalized Denotified,
Nomadic and Semi-Nomadic community. Consequently, if any
transfer is at all to be permitted under the Scheme, it must
remain consistent with its constitutional object and be so
regulated that the benefits of the Scheme are not diverted outside
the beneficiary community by reason of superior economic
strength or unequal bargaining power, thereby frustrating the very
purpose for which the Scheme was conceived.
18. Thus, we direct that the plots alloted under the general
welfare scheme to the nomadic and semi-nomadic Gadia Lohar
community, under the Keer Kheda Gadia Lohar Yojana
implemented by the municipal authorities, whereby about 184
residential plots were allotted in and around the year 2005 to
eligible members of the Gadia Lohar community, shall remain
vested in the same allottees. Any transfer of ownership, leasehold
rights, sale, gift, exchange, assignment, bequest or creation of
any third-party interest in favour of a person not belonging to the
Gadia Lohar community, effected contrary to the object, shall
stand cancelled, quashed and set aside by this order, even if such
transfer is made in accordance with any order/Scheme/Policy,
which would purport to legalize such transfer. Such a direction is
necessary not merely to enforce the conditions of allotment but to
preserve the constitutional character of the Scheme as an
instrument of rehabilitation, social justice and substantive equality
for a historically disadvantaged community. It shall be open to
such persons to seek compensation and costs, in case they have
(Uploaded on 13/07/2026 at 03:53:59 PM)
(Downloaded on 01/08/2026 at 12:10:34 AM)

(23 of 26)
[2026:RJ-JP:30365-DB] [CW-20835/2025]
paid any consideration to members of the Gadia Lohar community
in lieu of the property.
18.1.Ownership and transfer of plots allotted under the Keer
Kheda Gadia Lohar Yojana shall remain confined to members of
the Gadia Lohar community. Accordingly, any transfer after the
completion of twenty years, if at all and otherwise permissible in
law, shall be made only in favour of a bona fide member of the
Gadia Lohar community, so that the welfare measure aimed at
eradicating nomadism and semi-nomadism continues to achieve
its intended constitutional object, and any future initiative
undertaken by the respondents strengthens and carries forward
the gains of the earlier welfare measures, rather than diluting or
defeating the constitutional purpose they were intended to serve.
Consequently, the sale, gift, exchange, assignment, transfer or
bequest of any plot allotted under the Keer Kheda Gadia Lohar
Yojana, or any similar rehabilitation scheme formulated for the
benefit of the Gadia Lohar community, in favour of a person who is
not a member of the Gadia Lohar community, shall be void and
shall confer no right, title or interest upon such transferee. No
authority shall recognize or act upon any such transfer, nor shall
any mutation or consequential revenue or municipal entry be
effected on its basis. Where any such transfer is found to have
been effected in contravention of this direction, the allotment shall
stand cancelled and the plot shall revest in the State Government
or the concerned local authority, as the case may be, for fresh
(Uploaded on 13/07/2026 at 03:53:59 PM)
(Downloaded on 01/08/2026 at 12:10:34 AM)

(24 of 26)
[2026:RJ-JP:30365-DB] [CW-20835/2025]
allotment to an eligible member of the Gadia Lohar community in
accordance with law.
18.2.This Court is further of the considered opinion that if
transactions of the nature brought to the notice of this Court,
whereby plots allotted under a welfare scheme are subsequently
permitted to be transferred or diverted to persons outside the
beneficiary community through administrative relaxation,
misinterpretation or otherwise, or the allotment process itself is
abused so as to facilitate the indirect acquisition of such plots by
persons who were never intended to be the beneficiaries of the
Scheme, are allowed to continue, the same would inevitably erode
the very foundation of such welfare measures. It is high time that
the allotment of public property by way of free residential plots,
which is an exceptional measure and ought to be resorted to only
sparingly, is preserved exclusively for genuine public welfare and
the upliftment of the downtrodden sections of society for whom
such schemes are conceived. Public property cannot be permitted
to become an instrument of private enrichment through
administrative relaxation or indirect transfers in favour of ineligible
persons, for such a course is manifestly opposed to public interest
and defeats the very constitutional object underlying such welfare
measures.
18.3.The present case itself illustrates the anomaly, where, on the
one hand, the State has initiated a fresh exercise for the
identification and rehabilitation of Nomadic and Semi-Nomadic
communities by providing residential pattas, while, on the other
(Uploaded on 13/07/2026 at 03:53:59 PM)
(Downloaded on 01/08/2026 at 12:10:34 AM)

(25 of 26)
[2026:RJ-JP:30365-DB] [CW-20835/2025]
hand, the benefits already secured under an earlier rehabilitation
scheme have been permitted to be diluted through administrative
relaxation. Such an approach not only defeats the object of the
earlier Scheme but also results in avoidable dissipation of public
resources by requiring the State to repeatedly undertake the very
exercise of rehabilitation which had already been accomplished.
This Court is, therefore, of the considered view that such
tendencies must be nipped in the bud, so that public property
earmarked for the advancement of historically disadvantaged
communities is preserved exclusively for the purpose for which it
was entrusted by the State.
19. Before parting, this Court considers it appropriate to observe
that the progress of a constitutional democracy is measured not
merely by the rights it proclaims, but equally by the protection it
extends to those who have historically remained on its margins. It
is, therefore, expected that the respondents shall implement the
aforesaid directions in their true letter and spirit, so that the
object of the Keer Kheda Gadia Lohar Yojana or any other scheme
of such nature is preserved for the benefit of the community for
whom it was conceived, and the constitutional promise of
rehabilitation, dignity and substantive equality is meaningfully
realized.
20. Accordingly, for the reasons recorded hereinabove, the
present Public Interest Litigation stands allowed in the aforesaid
terms. The respondents are directed to ensure compliance with
the directions of this judgment within a period of thirty (30) days
(Uploaded on 13/07/2026 at 03:53:59 PM)
(Downloaded on 01/08/2026 at 12:10:34 AM)

(26 of 26)
[2026:RJ-JP:30365-DB] [CW-20835/2025]
from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Pending
application(s), if any, stand disposed of.
(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J (DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J
15/Zeeshan
(Uploaded on 13/07/2026 at 03:53:59 PM)
(Downloaded on 01/08/2026 at 12:10:34 AM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)