Vinod Kumar Jat vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 6436 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6318/2022

Vinod Kumar Jat S/o Prabhu Lal, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Bagund, Tehsil Bhadesar, Chittorgarh, Rajasthan.

----Petitioner Versus

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

2. The District Collector, Chittorgarh.

3. The Tehsildar, Bhadesar, District Chittorgarh.

4. The Sub Divisional Officer, District Chittorgarh.

5. The Gram Panchayat, Bagund, Tehsil Bhadesar, District Chittorgarh.

                                                                ----Respondents




For Petitioner(s)        :     Mr. Rishabh Tayal
For Respondent(s)        :     -



           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI

Order

04/05/2022

The petitioner has approached this Court by way of this writ

petition (PIL) with the following prayers:-

"The respondents may be directed to take immediate steps so as to restrain the trespass over the said land and the miscreants who have committed trespass over the said land may be dealt with by way of deterrent action."

Having heard and considered the submissions advanced by

counsel representing the petitioner and, having gone through the

material available on record, we are of the firm view that the

(2 of 4) [CW-6318/2022]

petitioner has available to him a suitable remedy for ventilating

his grievances by virtue of the Division Bench Judgment of this

Court in the case of Jagdish Prasad Meena & Ors. Vs. State of

Rajasthan & Ors. passed in D.B. Civil Writ Petition (PIL)

No.10819/2018 decided on 30.01.2019 wherein this Court

directed as below:-

"This Court is inundated with large number of writ petitions, styled as public interest litigation, from almost all the Districts of the State, with allegations of encroachment over the pasture land/ land of 'johad', 'talab'/ river/river bed/public way/Shamshan/Kabristan etc. In all such petitions, common allegation is that despite repeated complaints/representations to the concerned revenue officers, no steps are taken by them to remove the encroachment. This results in number of writ petitions being filed by the complainants/representationists before this Court. This Court has been passing orders in such matters requiring the respective District Collectors to examine the factual content of the allegations and take steps to remove the encroachments so as to secure such land.

In order therefore to provide a pan-Rajasthan solution to this ever persisting problem, we deem it appropriate to direct the Chief Secretary of the State to devise a permanent mechanism, which should be operational in every District of the State where the concerned District Collector should be required to periodically notify for the information of the general public to lodge the complaints/representations with regard to such encroachments with a specially designated Public Land Protection Cell (for short 'PLPC') for rural areas. The PLPC should be headed by District Collector and function under his direction and supervision. The PLPC shall get such complaints/representations enquired into by deputing concerned Sub DivisionalOfficer/Tehsildar/Naib Tehsildar so as to verify whether or not such encroachments have actually taken place on such land. If the allegations are found to be substantiated, appropriate steps in accordance with law be immediately taken for removal of the encroachments and appropriate penal action be also taken against the trespassers. The complaints/representations received in the PLPC

(3 of 4) [CW-6318/2022]

should be decided by passing speaking order, informing the respective complainant/representationist about the action taken. This would obviate the necessity of such complainants/ representationists approaching this Court directly by way of public interest litigation. If this practice is put in place, this Court would not be inclined to directly entertain such public interest litigation or would do so only in the event of inaction on the part of the concerned PLPC. The PLPC aforementioned shall also keep in view the guidelines issued by the Supreme Court in Jagpal Singh & Others Vs. State of Punjab & Others, (2011) 11 SCC 396wherein all the State Governments of the country were directed that they should prepare schemes for eviction of illegal/ unauthorised occupants of the Gram Sabha/GramPanchayat/Poramboke/ Shamlat land and the same must be restored to the Gram Sabha/Gram Panchayat for the common use of villagers of the village. The said scheme should provide for the speedy eviction of such illegal occupants, after giving them a showcause notice and a brief hearing. It was further held therein that long duration of the illegal encroachment/occupation of land or huge expenditure in making construction thereon or political connections of trespassers are no justification for regularising such illegal occupation. Regularisation should be permitted only in exceptional cases where lease has been granted under some government notification e.g. to landless labourers or members of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes or where there is already a school, hospital, dispensary, 'shamshan', 'kabristan' or other public utility of the like nature on the land.

Thus, the petitioner is relegated to submit a representation

to the District Collector concerned, who shall assign the matter to

the PLPC constituted under the directions of this Court.

The PLPC shall have a thorough enquiry conducted into the

representation of the petitioner in light of the directions given by

this Court in the case of Jagdish Prasad Meena (Supra) and

decide the same within a period of three months from the date of

submission thereof.

(4 of 4) [CW-6318/2022]

In case, any adverse order is passed, the petitioner shall be

at liberty to challenge the same as per law.

The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms.

(VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J (SANDEEP MEHTA),J

100-/Devesh/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)