Rajasthan High Court
Hanuman Sahai S/O Shri Ganesh ... vs Shri Avinash Sharma, Principal ... on 9 February, 2021
Bench: Sabina, Manoj Kumar Vyas
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 1011/2017
In
D.B. Civil Writ Petition (PIL) No. 5756/2015
1. Hanuman Sahai S/o Shri Ganesh Narain, Aged about 61
years,
2. Narain S/o Bhura Ram, Aged about 65 years,
Both are R/o Village Keriya Ka Bass Ward No.1 Bagru, District
Jaipur (Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Shri Avinash Sharma, Principal Secretary, Revenue
Department, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Shri Mukesh Kumar Sharma Principal Secretary, Urban
Development And Housing Department, Secretariat,
Jaipur.
3. Shri Pramod Mahajan District Collector Jaipur.
4. Shri Vaibhav Galariya Commissioner, Jaipur Development
Athority, JLN Marg, Jaipur.
5. Shri Raj Kumar Singh Deputy Commissioner, Zone-12,
Jaipur Development Authority Jaipur.
6. Shri Mukesh Meena Tehsildar, Sanganer Jaipur.
7. Shri Mukesh Agrawal, Sub Tehsildar, Bagru Tehsil
Sanganer, Jaipur.
8. Kajod Mal S/o Shri Syoram, R/o Village Keriya Ka Bass
Bagru District Jaipur (Raj.).
9. Hanuman Sahay Verma S/o Birdhi Chand, R/o Village
Keriya Ka Bass Bagru District Jaipur (Raj.)
10. The State Of Rajasthan Through Principal Secretary,
Revenue Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan Secretariat,
Jaipur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. T.L. Pandey, Advocate
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Yashodhar Pandey, Advocate for
Mr. Anil Mehta, Additional Advocate
General
(2 of 3) [CCP-1011/2017]
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR VYAS
Judgment / Order
09/02/2021
Petitioners have filed the contempt petition alleging the
disobedience of the order dated 05.12.2016 passed by this Court.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone
through the record available on the file carefully.
As per the reply submitted by the respondents,
encroachments on the land in dispute were identified and notices
under Section 72 of the Jaipur Development Authority Act, 1982
were issued to the encroachers and finally on 10.06.2017, the
encroachments had been removed.
In an additional affidavit dated 04.11.2019, it has been
submitted that so far as khasra no. 457 and 196 are concerned,
the same were free from any illegal encroachment. So far as
khasra no. 449 is concerned, there was partial encroachment
measuring 0.09 hectares and the encroacher had constructed a
permanent house. The construction was thirty five years old and
water and electricity connection had been granted in the year
1977. The said khasra number was adjacent to the residential
area of village bearing khasra no. 208 and 209. A proposal had
been sent to Jaipur Development Authority by the Nagar Palika in
increasing the residential area. Ward Member had also written
letter to Jaipur Development Authority for regularization of khasra
no. 449. The encroacher had also moved an application to Jaipur
Development Authority for regularization of the land in his
possession and the said application was pending. In case, the
(3 of 3) [CCP-1011/2017]
application moved by the encroacher was not accepted, then the
illegal encroachment would be immediately got removed.
Learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that the
application moved by the encroacher on khasra no. 449 for
regularization would be decided within three months from today.
In view of the reply submitted by the State as well as the
submissions made by learned counsel for the respondents, no
ground for further interference is made out.
Petition stands disposed of accordingly.
Rule stands discharged.
(MANOJ KUMAR VYAS),J (SABINA),J
Mohita /44
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
