Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Amba Ram vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:37505) on 10 September, 2024
Author: Rekha Borana
Bench: Rekha Borana
[2024:RJ-JD:37505]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15217/2024
1. Amba Ram S/o Shri Gaduka Ram, Aged About 36 Years,
Resident Of - Vpo Mailawas, Siwana, District Balotra,
Rajasthan.
2. Bhakar Ram S/o Shri Gaduka Ram, Aged About 39 Years,
Resident Of - Vpo Mailawas, Siwana, District Balotra,
Rajasthan.
3. Vagata Ram S/o Shri Gaduka Ram, Aged About 50 Years,
Resident Of - Vpo Mailawas, Siwana, District Balotra,
Rajasthan.
4. Nimba Ram S/o Shri Balu Ji, Aged About 36 Years,
Resident Of - Vpo Mailawas, Siwana, District Balotra,
Rajasthan.
5. Kumpa Ram S/o Shri Lala Ram, Aged About 34 Years,
Resident Of - Vpo Mailawas, Siwana, District Balotra,
Rajasthan.
6. Bhopa Ram S/o Shri Baloo Ram, Aged About 53 Years,
Resident Of - Vpo Mailawas, Siwana, District Balotra,
Rajasthan.
7. Lumba Ram S/o Shri Baloo Ji, Aged About 27 Years,
Resident Of - Vpo Mailawas, Siwana, District Balotra,
Rajasthan.
8. Joga Ram S/o Shri Darga Ram, Aged About 56 Years,
Resident Of - Vpo Mailawas, Siwana, District Balotra,
Rajasthan.
9. Jodha Ram S/o Shri Jomta Ram, Aged About 39 Years,
Resident Of - Vpo Mailawas, Siwana, District Balotra,
Rajasthan.
10. Triloka Ram S/o Shri Lala Ram, Aged About 33 Years,
Resident Of - Vpo Mailawas, Siwana, District Balotra,
Rajasthan.
11. Lala Ram S/o Shri Koja Ram, Aged About 75 Years,
Resident Of - Vpo Mailawas, Siwana, District Balotra,
Rajasthan.
12. Chaina Ram S/o Shri Baloo Ram, Aged About 43 Years,
Resident Of - Vpo Mailawas, Siwana, District Balotra,
Rajasthan.
(Downloaded on 11/09/2024 at 08:54:09 PM)
[2024:RJ-JD:37505] (2 of 5) [CW-15217/2024]
13. Roopa Ram S/o Shri Vagta Ram, Aged About 25 Years,
Resident Of - Vpo Mailawas, Siwana, District Balotra,
Rajasthan.
14. Ghevar Ram S/o Shri Vagta Ram, Aged About 25 Years,
Resident Of - Vpo Mailawas, Siwana, District Balotra,
Rajasthan.
15. Ajay Ram S/o Shri Vagta Ram, Aged About 23 Years,
Resident Of - Vpo Mailawas, Siwana, District Balotra,
Rajasthan.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Rural
Development And Panchayati Raj, Government Of
Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Barmer, District
Barmer, Rajasthan.
3. Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Siwana,
District Balotra, Rajasthan.
4. The District Collector, Balotra, Rajasthan.
5. The Sub Division Officer, Siwana, Rajasthan.
6. Gram Panchayat Mahilawas, Through Its Sarpanch, Tehsil
And District Balotra, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jitesh Kandare
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manish Patel, AAG with
Ms. Nandipa Gehlot
Mr. Devendra Singh Pidiyar for
Mr. S.S. Ladrecha, AAG
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA
Order
10/09/2024
1. The present writ petition has been preferred aggrieved of the
office order dated 08.09.2024 whereby the Chief Medical and
Health Officer, Siwana, Balotra has been directed to keep a
[2024:RJ-JD:37505] (3 of 5) [CW-15217/2024]
medical team ready from 09.09.2024 to 11.09.2024 as the
encroachments in village Mailawas were to be removed by the Sub
Divisional Officer, Siwana on the said dates.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that no notice,
whatsoever, was served on the petitioners by the SDO and
straightaway the proceedings for removal of the alleged
encroachments have been sought to be undertaken. Learned
counsel submits that most of the petitioners are having valid patta
in their favour issued by the Gram Panchayat and some of them
have already applied for issuance of the patta qua which the
proceedings are pending before the Gram Panchayat. He submits
that still, without service of any notice, the proceedings are being
sought to be taken from 09.09.2024 to 11.09.2024 to dispossess
the petitioners.
3. Learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of
the respondent Department submits that the said proceedings
have been initiated in compliance of the order passed in D.B.
Civil Writ Petition No.12988/2021; Arjun Singh Vs. State of
Rajasthan & Ors., decided on 21.09.2021. He submits that the
respondent authorities are facing contempt proceedings in D.B.
Writ Contempt Petitions No.915/2021 & 345/2024 and hence, the
respondent authorities are under an obligation to comply with the
order dated 21.09.2021.
4. So far as the service of prior notice on the petitioners is
concerned, learned AAG has been unable to satisfy this Court.
5. Heard learned counsels and perused the record.
6. A bare perusal of the order dated 21.09.2021 passed by
Hon'ble the Division Bench in D.B. Civil Writ Petition
[2024:RJ-JD:37505] (4 of 5) [CW-15217/2024]
No.12988/2021 makes it clear that Hon'ble Division Bench, vide
the said order, directed the respondent authorities to decide the
representation of the petitioner in light of order dated 30.01.2019
passed in D.B. Civil Writ (PIL) Petition
No.10819/2018;Jagdish Prasad Meena & Ors. Vs. State of
Rajasthan & Ors.
7. In Jagdish Prasad Meena's case (supra), the Division
Bench had directed that all the matters pertaining to
encroachment on public land in revenue villages be decided by the
Public Land Protection Cell (PLPC) and as per the said directions, a
show cause notice and an opportunity of hearing to the alleged
encroachers or the persons in occupation of the land, was a must.
The said judgment nowhere provided that the State would be
under an authority to remove the alleged encroachments or
dispossess the people who have a valid document/title in their
favour, without any legal procedure being adopted or without
providing any opportunity of hearing to them.
8. Herein, it is admitted that no notice, whatsoever, was served
on the petitioners and it seems that just because the contempt
proceedings have been initiated against the respondent
authorities, they have, in haste, proceeded on to take action for
removal of possession of the petitioners. The said action of the
respondent authorities is totally illegal and against the basic
principles of natural justice.
9. In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed
of with a direction to the petitioners to file detailed
representations before the Collector, Balotra within a period of ten
days from now. The Collector, Balotra, who presides over the
[2024:RJ-JD:37505] (5 of 5) [CW-15217/2024]
PLPC, shall be under an obligation to decide the same in
accordance with law, after providing an opportunity of hearing to
the petitioners, within a period of four weeks thereafter. The
petitioners shall be at liberty to file all the documents in support of
their possession on the land in question and the Collector shall be
under an obligation to consider all the documents while deciding
the representations of the petitioners.
10. Till the date, the representations as filed by the petitioners
are decided, no coercive action, whatsoever, shall be taken against
them. However, if the Collector reaches to a conclusion that the
petitioners are encroachers on the land in question, the
respondent authorities shall be at liberty to proceed in accordance
with law for removal of the said encroachment.
11. Stay petition and the pending applications, if any, also stand
disposed of.
(REKHA BORANA),J
266-Vij/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
