Disposed

Kasam Khan v. State and Ors.

Rajasthan HC15 Jan 2018CW/3090/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging a notice to remove encroachment. Petitioner sought to regularize land. Court allowed interim stay: Gram Panchayat to consider petitioner's reply within two weeks; petitioner restrained from constructing, and Panchayat from dispossessing him until final decision.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner to file reply within two weeks; Gram Panchayat to consider and decide thereafter; petitioner restrained from construction; respondents restrained from dispossession till final decision.

Kasam Khan Vs State and Ors. — Landlord and Tenant | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3090 / 2016

¶3

Kasam Khan S/o Alla Bachaya, aged about 40 years, resident of Nagaur Road, Khichan, Panchayat Samiti Phalodi, District Jodhpur.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

1 The State of Rajasthan through the Secretary, Department of Panchayati Raj, Secretariat, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶7

The District Collector, Jodhpur.

¶8

Gram Panchayat, Khichan, Panchayat Samiti Phalodi, District Jodhpur through its Secretary.

¶9

Gram Sevak, Gram Panchayat Khichan, Panchayat Samiti Phalodi, District Jodhpur through its Sarpanch.

¶10

----Respondent

¶11

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Muktesh Maheshwari

¶12

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manish Patel, AGC

¶13

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

¶14

Order

¶15

15/01/2018

¶16

The matter comes up for consideration of application (APPLW No.131/2018) preferred on behalf of the respondents under Article 226(3) of the Constitution of India for vacation of interim order dated 17.03.2016.

¶17

With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is finally heard and decided today itself.

¶18

By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the notice issued by the Gram Panchayat, Khichan directing the petitioner to remove the encroachment made by him over the land of Khasara No.156 belonging to the Gram Panchayat, Khichan.

¶19

(2 of 3)

¶20

[CW-3090/2016]

¶21

In this writ petition, the petitioner has averred that his application for regularization of the land of Khasara No.156 is pending with the Gram Panchayat, Khichan, however, without taking any final decision on the said application, the Gram Panchayat, Khichan is forcibly dispossessing the petitioner from the land in question by issuing notices to him from time to time.

¶22

Learned counsel for the respondents has urged that no application has ever been filed by the petitioner with a prayer for regularization of the land in question and as a matter of fact, the petitioner has encroached over the land of Gram Panchayat, Khichan falling in Khasara No.156, therefore, the Gram Panchayat, Khichan has issued notices to him from time to time for removing the said encroachment. Learned counsel for the respondent has therefore argued that the writ petition is having no force and the same is liable to be dismissed.

¶23

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to file reply to the impugned notice issued by the Gram Panchayat, Khichan for removing of the encroachment from the land of Khasara No.156 within a period of two weeks. The Gram Panchayat, Khichan shall consider the said reply and finally decide the matter within a period of two weeks thereafter.

¶24

It is made clear that if any application is filed by the petitioner for regularization of the land of Khasara No.156 prior to issuance of impugned notice, then the same may also be decided by the Gram Panchayat, Khichan.

¶25

Till the final decision passed by the Gram Panchayat,

¶26

(3 of 3)

¶27

[CW-3090/2016]

¶28

Khichan, the petitioner is restrained from raising any construction over the land in question and over the land of Khasara No.156 of the Gram Panchayat, Khichan. The respondents are also restrained from dispossessing the petitioner from land in question till then.

¶29

Needless to say that if the decision of Gram Panchayat, Khichan goes against the petitioner, the petitioner will be at liberty to avail appropriate remedy available to him under the law.

¶30

Stay petition also stands disposed of.

¶31

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J.

¶32

Taruna

Kasam Khan v. State and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kasam Khan v. State and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nancy Joshi and Anr. Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Smt. Rupa and Anr. Vs State and Ors.

Vikram Singh Chundawat Vs Senior Manager Hindutan Pet. and Ors.

M/S. Jeetu Products Vs State and Anr.

M/S. Manish Contractor Vs State and Ors.

Prithvi Raj Vs State and Anr.