Khima Ram vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 12266 Raj

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 12266 Raj
Judgement Date : 13 October, 2022

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Khima Ram vs State Of Rajasthan on 13 October, 2022

Bench: Sandeep Mehta, Kuldeep Mathur

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13515/2022

1. Khima Ram S/o Thakraram Devasi, Aged About 51 Years, Telpi Kheda, Panchayat Krishanganj, Tehsil And District Sirohi, Rajasthan.

2. Lalaram S/o Bagaji, Aged About 67 Years, Telpi Kheda, Panchayat Krishanganj, Tehsil And District Sirohi, Rajasthan.

3. Gokalram S/o Vagji, Aged About 73 Years, Telpi Kheda, Panchayat Krishanganj, Tehsil And District Sirohi, Rajasthan.

4. Khetaram S/o Ragunath, Aged About 67 Years, Telpi Kheda, Panchayat Krishanganj, Tehsil And District Sirohi, Rajasthan.

----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through District Collector, Sirohi.

2. Sub Divisional Officer, Sirohi, District Sirohi.

3. Tehsildar, Sirohi, District Sirohi.

4. Director, Gram Dani Board, Dhabhai Ji Ki Haveli, Sirah Dyodhi Bazar, Jaipur.

5. Gram Sabha, Telpi Kheda, Tehsil Sirohi, District Sirohi, Through Its President / Administrator.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bharat Shrimali

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

Order

13/10/2022

The petitioners have approached this Court by way of this

writ petition (PIL) with the following prayers:-

"a. The respondents may kindly be directed to remove the encroachment made upon khasra no.

(2 of 5) [CW-13515/2022]

536 and 539 of Gramdani village Telpi Kheda, Tehsil & District Sirohi.

b. The directions to be issued to the State to initiate action against those persons who have encroached upon the Government land."

Having heard and considered the submissions advanced by

counsel representing the petitioners and, having gone through the

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

petitioners have available to them a suitable remedy for

ventilating their 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

(3 of 5) [CW-13515/2022]

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 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

(4 of 5) [CW-13515/2022]

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 petitioners are 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 petitioners 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 'six months' from the date of

submission thereof.

(5 of 5) [CW-13515/2022]

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

at liberty to challenge the same as per law.