Lease Entries on Pasture, Forest Land Quashed: Rajasthan HC

Jamabandi Mining Lease Entries on Pasture and Forest Land Quashed; Any Allotment Must Follow Law: Rajasthan High Court

Published: 31 October 2026 · NyayVidhan

A Division Bench of the Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur quashed jamabandi entries of 12 February 2024 that showed mining lease notes on Khasra Nos. 1242/258 and 1244/258 of Village Guda, Tehsil Kolayat, Bikaner, recorded as hill-and-pasture (charagah) land and forest land (paras 6, 9). The District Collector traced the pencil notes to a probationer patwari, and the State said no lease had been executed for that land (paras 6, 8). Any future allotment must follow the law (para 9).

Key holdings

Jamabandi entries of 12 February 2024 for Khasra Nos. 1242/258 (hill and pasture) and 1244/258 (forest) were quashed (para 9).

The Collector attributed the pencil notes to a probationer patwari who used pencil instead of red ink (para 6).

The State said no mining lease had been executed for, and no mining was taking place on, the two khasras (para 8).

Any future allotment of these lands by the State Government must be in accordance with law (para 9).

Judgment digest by NyayVidhan: a summary of the court's judgment, not its text. The judgment itself is the authoritative version.

Brief Facts

Five petitioners brought what the order calls a public interest litigation over the original Khasra No. 258 of Village Guda, Tehsil Kolayat, District Bikaner, now sub-divided into four khasras (paras 2, 6). Respondent No. 6 holds a mining lease executed on 25 August 2008 and mines part of that land (paras 3, 6, 7). The petitioners said that, after a Tehsildar's order of 4 January 2023, a patwari's pencil note registered 675.01 bighas of Khasra No. 1242/258 and 50 bighas of Khasra No. 1244/258 under several mining leases, though that land is hill, pasture and forest land not allottable for mining (paras 3-4). On 25 May 2026 the Court called for the District Collector's affidavit explaining the notes (para 5).

Court's Findings

The District Collector's affidavit, reproduced by the Court, states that the patwari had been ordered to mark the mining lease in the record, and that a probationer patwari inadvertently made the marking in pencil instead of red ink (para 6). Its khasra-wise table records Khasra No. 1242/258 (675-01 bigha) as ‘Gair Mumkin Pahad and Parvat – Charagah’ and Khasra No. 1244/258 (50 bigha) in the name of the Forest Department; both carry lease notes, but no mining is being carried out on either (para 6). Mining takes place on about 30 bigha of Khasra Nos. 1241/258 and 1243/258 (para 6). Respondent No. 6 stated that it works only within the area leased under its 2008 deed (para 7). The Additional Advocate General stated that the entries arose from the patwari's inadvertent mistake, that the land is hill and forest land, and that no mining lease has been executed for it in favour of anyone (para 8). On that record the Court quashed the revenue entries in the jamabandi of 12 February 2024 (Annexure 24) for the two khasras, making clear that any future allotment by the State Government must be in accordance with law (para 9).

Legal Principle

Where the State itself accepts that lease notes entered in the jamabandi against land recorded as pasture and forest were an official's inadvertent mistake, and that no lease was executed for that land, the High Court may quash the entries in writ jurisdiction; any later allotment must be made in accordance with law (paras 6, 8-9).

NyayVidhan's view · Practice note

Why It Matters

The order rests on the State's own record: once the District Collector's affidavit traced the lease notes on land recorded as charagah and forest to a probationer patwari, and the State said no lease existed for that land, the entries were quashed (paras 6, 8-9). Residents who find common land shown under a lease in the jamabandi can ask the writ court to call for the Collector's explanation, as happened here (para 5). The order does not decide whether these lands may ever be leased; any allotment must follow the law (para 9). On one lawful route for pasture land, see Narendra Singh Bhati: the Collector may change its classification under Rule 7, with prior State permission above 4 hectares.

Editorial comment by the NyayVidhan Editorial Desk. It is not part of the Court's judgment and is not legal advice.