Dismissed

Pradeep Kumar Son of Shri Bharat Chand Sharma v. Principal Secretary

Rajasthan HC12 Dec 2019CW/5756/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan dismissed a PIL petition seeking removal of alleged encroachment from public utility land. The court held that the dispute was purely private between the petitioner and allottees of a Housing Cooperative Society, thus no ground for interference existed.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to seek other appropriate remedy as per law.

Pradeep Kumar Son of Shri Bharat Chand Sharma Vs… — Landlord and Tenant | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

¶2

BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

D.B. Civil Writ Petition(PIL) No. 5756/2019

¶4

Pradeep Kumar Son Of Shri Bharat Chand Sharma, Aged About 63 Years, Resident Of M-18, Madhuban Colony, Jaipur (Rajasthan)

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

Principal Secretary, Urban Development And Housing Department, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶8

Director, Local Bodies Directorate, Near Cvil Lines Phatak, Jaipur.

¶9

Nagar Nigam Jaipur, Through Its Chief Executive, Lal Kothi, Jaipur.

¶10

Commissioner, Zone-5, Nagar Nigam, Lal Kothi, Jaipur.

¶11

Mohd. Firoz (Kale Khan Chajju Khan), E-21, Madhuban South West Extension Colony, Near Tonk Puliya, Tonk Phatak, Jaipur.

¶12

Commissioner, Jaipur Development Authority, Ram Kishore Vyas Bhawan, Indira Circle, J.l.n. Marg, Jaipur.

¶13

Secretary, Jaipur Development Authority, Ram Kishore Vyas Bhawan, Indira Circle, J.l.n. Marg, Jaipur.

¶14

Shri Satya Narayan Natani S/o Shri Gopal Lal Natani, E- 17, Madhuban South West Extension Colony, Near Tonk Puliya, Tonk Phatak, Jaipur.

¶15

Smt. Jubaida Bai W/o Shri Abdul Mazid, E-18 And E-19, Madhuban South West Extension Colony, Near Tonk Puliya, Tonk Phatak, Jaipur.

¶16

Smt. Geeta Devi W/o Shri Suresh Narayan, E-20, Madhuban South West Extension Colony, Near Tonk Puliya, Tonk Phatak, Jaipur.

¶17

Prahlad Kumar, E-22, Madhuban South West Extension Colony, Near Tonk Puliya, Tonk Phatak, Jaipur.

¶18

Hem Singh S/o Dhan Singh, E-23 And E-24, Madhuban South West Extension Colony, Near Tonk Puliya, Tonk Phatak, Jaipur.

¶19

Smt. Shanti Devi W/o Shri Shiv Ram, E-25 And E-26, Madhuban South West Extension Colony, Near Tonk Pulia,

(2 of 3)

[CW-5756/2019]

Tonk Phatak, Jaipur.

Smt. Snehlata Sharma W/o Premnarayan Sharma, E-27, Madhban South West Extension Colony, Near Tonk Puliya, Tonk Phatak, Jaipur.

¶24

Shri Abdul Aziz S/o Shri Abdul Mazid, E-28, Madhuban South West Extension Colony, Near Tonk Puliya, Tonk Phatak, Jaipur.

¶25

Shri Naimuddin S/o Shri Abdul Mazid, E-29, Madhuban South West Extension Colony, Near Tonk Puliya, Tonk Phatak, Jaipur.

¶26

Smt. Prabha W/o Shri Om Prakash, E-30, Madhuban South West Extension Colony, Near Tonk Puliya, Tonk Phatak, Jaipur.

¶27

----Respondents

¶28

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Manoj Kumar Bhardwaj, Advocate
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Virendra Lodha, Senior Counsel with Mr. Atishay Jain, Advocate Mr. Anil Mehta, Additional Advocate General with Mr. Yatharth Gupta, Advocate Mr. Sudesh Bansal, Advocate with Mr. Mohd. Adil on behalf of respondents No.5,9 15 & 16 Ms. Ritu Pathak, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Anand Sharma, Advocate

¶29

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA

¶30

Order

¶31

12/12/2019

¶32

Petitioner has filed this Public Interest Litigation seeking removal of the encroachment from the Public Park/Government Public Utility Land.

¶33

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the private respondents have encroached upon the Public Park/Government Public Utility Land.

¶34

(3 of 3) [CW-5756/2019]

¶35

Learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, have submitted that the dispute between the parties can be said to be purely a private dispute.

¶36

A perusal of the prayer clause of the writ petition reveals that it has been prayed by the petitioner that respondents may be directed to remove the encroachment from all plots i.e. Plot Nos.E-17 to E-30 of the Madhuban South West Extension Scheme (Colony), Tonk Pathak, Jaipur. It has also been prayed that the lease deed issued by the Jaipur Development Authority to any encroacher may be declared null and void. It has further been prayed that the respondents be directed to dismantle the construction raised on Plot Nos.E-17 to E-30. Any ongoing construction on Plot No.E-21 be stopped.

¶37

Present case involves disputed questions of fact. Petitioner has sought removal of encroachment from Plots i.e. Plot Nos.E-17 to E-30. It is the case of the petitioner that the plots-in-question are, in fact, public utility land, whereas, it is the case of the private respondents that the plots-in-question were allotted to them by the Housing Cooperative Society which was approved by the Jaipur Development Authority.

¶38

Thus, it appears that the dispute between the parties can be said to be purely a private dispute. Hence, no ground for interference by this court is made out.

¶39

Dismissed.

¶40

Petitioner would be at liberty to seek other appropriate remedy as per law, if so advised.

¶41

(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J

¶42

(SABINA),J

¶43

Gourav/Jatin/01

Pradeep Kumar Son of Shri Bharat Chand Sharma v. Principal Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pradeep Kumar Son of Shri Bharat Chand Sharma v. Principal Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Secretary, Vs Ilashree Yogi D/O Sant Nath Yogi

The Secretary, Vs Ilashree Yogi D/O Sant Nath Yogi

Commissioner of Central Goods and Ser Tax Vs Tanwar Industries

School of Aeronautics Vs Union of India

C.S. Chacha S/O Late Shri R.R. Chacha Vs Shri Vaibhav Galriya, Principal Secretary

M/S Shree Sharma Steel Rolling Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India