Fateh Singh vs The State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 17793 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 895/2019

Fateh Singh S/o Shri Panna Singh, Aged About 60 Years, By Caste Rawat, Resident Of Nandavat Bheem, Tehsil Bheem, District Rajsamand.

----Petitioner Versus

1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Revenue Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

2. The District Collector, Rajsamand.

3. The Tehsildar, Bheem, District Rajsamand.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Surendra Singh Choudhary For Respondent(s) : Mr. RD Choudhary, Dy. GC

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

Order

26/11/2021

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner

is having land in Khasra No.1818 in village Nandawat, Tehsil

Bheem, District Rajsamand. Learned counsel for the petitioner

further submits that adjacent to the said land, there is Khasra

No.1817, in which, the petitioner is having prolonged possession.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the

Khasra No.1817 is recorded in the revenue record as bilanam and

there are many other persons apart from the petitioner, who are

also in possession on the same land. Learned counsel for the

petitioner also submits that the long possession of the petitioner

ought to be regularized upon the Government land.

(2 of 4) [CW-895/2019]

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in a

summary proceedings against the petitioner initiated upon the

letter of Senior Civil Judge-cum-Additional Chief Juridical

Magistrate, Bheem, District Rajsamand dated 25.10.2017,

learned Sub Divisional Officer Bheem took up proceedings against

the present petitioner for eviction. The proceedings were initiated

under Section 91 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 and

notice was served upon the petitioner on 26.10.2017, while giving

him an opportunity of hearing to appear on 02.11.2017.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in a

hurried manner, the notices have been issued upon the letter of

the concerned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate shows the

prejudice in the minds of the respondents, while seeking to evict

the present petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that while order of

eviction was being passed, the petitioner preferred an appeal

before the District Collector, Rajsamand, who also without giving

proper opportunity of hearing dismissed the appeal on dated

19.04.2018. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits

that alongwith the appeal, there was an application regarding the

inspection of land and calling for the report of site Commissioner,

which was also dismissed by the District Collector, Rajsamand.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the

judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of State of

Rajasthan Vs. Smt. Padmavati Devi (dead) by LRs. & Ors.

reported in 1995 DNJ (SC) 208.

Learned counsel for the respondent-State submits that it is

an admitted possession that the petitioner is an encroacher upon

the land situated in Khasra No.1817 and this is not only an

(3 of 4) [CW-895/2019]

encroachment, but it is very close to the National Highway and the

hazard of this kind of encroachment are much wide than simple

possession of the land.

Learned counsel for the respondent further submits that the

proceedings initiated against the petitioner was correct in law and

since admittedly the Khasra No.1817 is belong to State

Government, which is recorded in the revenue record as bilanam

and the petitioner being an encroacher cannot be given any

benefit by this Court. Learned counsel for respondent further

submits that the land in question is only 12 meters away from the

center point of the national highway and the petitioner is trying to

get a shop constructed over the said land is bound to create

serious traffic hazard.

Learned counsel for the respondent also submits that the

petitioner had an appropriate remedy against the order of the

learned District Collector and has also shown certain orders of

other persons, who have taken an alternate remedy as per the

Rajasthan Land Revenue Act, 1956 and the same have also been

dismissed.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record

of the case.

This Court takes note of the fact that it is an admitted

position that Khasra No.1817 situated at Village Nandawat, Tehsil

Bheem, District Rajsamand is a Government land recorded as

bilanam and the petitioner is nothing more than an encroacher.

The precedent law cited by learned counsel for the petitioner is of

no help, as it was an outcome of a peculiar factual matrix, which

does not apply in the present case. The traffic hazard being

pointed out by the counsel for the State as a land is just adjoining

(4 of 4) [CW-895/2019]

to the National Highway and is only 12 meters away from the

center point of the national highway, is also a cause of grave

concern. The proceedings on record show that proper notice was

given to the petitioner and opportunity of hearing was also given

before the order was passed. The orders are well reasoned and

the proceedings adopted by the concerned authorities are in

accordance with law, hence, this Court does not find anything in

the writ petition.

In light of the aforesaid observations, there is no ground for

granting any intervention to the present petitioner in the writ

jurisdiction, the writ petition is, thus, dismissed with a direction to

the State to remove encroachment from the Khasra No.1817

expeditiously.

Stay petition as well as all pending applications also stand

dismissed accordingly.

(PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J

48-Sudheer/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)