Disposed

Net Ram v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC16 Mar 2021CW/4009/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Two connected writ petitions filed by residents of Dhandhusar challenging their removal from 'Gochar' land. The Division Bench found the dispute already adjudicated in a pending proceeding and disposed of the petitions with liberty to approach that Bench, citing judicial discipline.

What did the court decide?

Disposed of with liberty to take up cause before the Hon'ble Division Bench adjudicating a connected matter.

Net Ram Vs State of Rajasthan — Land Acquisition | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

¶2

JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4006/2021

¶4

Hetram S/o Shri Chunaram Ram, Aged About 61 Years, R/o Dhandhusar, Tehsil Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Revenue Department, Jaipur.

¶8

District Collector, Hanumangarh.

¶9

Tehsildar (Revenue), Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh.

¶10

Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh.

¶11

Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Village Dhandhusar, Tehsil Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh.

¶12

----Respondents

¶13

Connected With

¶14

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4009/2021

¶15

Net Ram S/o Shri Krishan Lal, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Dhandhusar, Tehsil Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh.

¶16

----Petitioner

¶17

Versus

¶18

State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Revenue Department, Jaipur.

¶19

District Collector, Hanumangarh.

¶20

Tehsildar (Revenue), Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh.

¶21

Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh.

¶22

Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Village Dhandhusar, Tehsil Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh.

¶23

----Respondents

¶24

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4017/2021

¶25

Devi Lal S/o Shri Kalu Ram, Aged About 70 Years, R/o Ward No. 5, Dhandhusar, Tehsil Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh.

----Petitioner

Versus

(2 of 3)

[CW-4006/2021]

State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Revenue Department, Jaipur.

¶31

District Collector, Hanumangarh.

¶32

Tehsildar (Revenue), Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh.

¶33

Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh.

¶34

Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Village Dhandhusar, Tehsil Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh.

¶35

----Respondents

¶36

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4033/2021

¶37

Sajanram S/o Shri Tulchha Ram, Aged About 62 Years, R/o Ward No. 5, Dhandhusar, Tehsil Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh.

¶38

----Petitioner

¶39

Versus

¶40

State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Revenue Department, Jaipur.

¶41

District Collector, Hanumangarh.

¶42

Tehsildar (Revenue), Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh.

¶43

Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh.

¶44

Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Village Dhandhusar, Tehsil Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh.

¶45

----Respondents

¶46

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vishal Singhal For Respondent(s) : Ms. Rekha Borana, AAG with Mr. Saransh Vij

¶47

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

¶48

Order

¶49

16/03/2021

¶50

In wake of onslaught of COVID-19, abundant caution is being taken while hearing the matters in Court.

¶51

The present writ petition has been preferred against the removal of petitioner from ‘Gochar’ land.

¶52

(3 of 3)

¶53

[CW-4006/2021]

¶54

Counsel for the petitioner fairly informs this Court that the issue is also being adjudicated by Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in D.B.C.W. No.18443/2018 (Satpal & Ors. Vs. State & Ors.)

¶55

Counsel for the petitioner submits that there are various grave irregularities on the part of State while pursuing the process of removal of encroachment and due process of law has not been adhered. Counsel for the petitioner further submits that not only due process of law has not been adhered to but the respondents are in a hurried manner are trying to remove the petitioners from their possession, which can be explained by them on merits.

¶56

This Court on seeing prayer and issue raised by the petitioners in the present writ petition is of the view that since the dispute of removal of encroachment on subject land is already been adjudicated by Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in D.B.C.W. No.18443/2018 (Satpal & Ors. Vs. State & Ors.), therefore, it would not be appropriate for this Court to make any intervention at this stage, however, in the interest of justice as well as to maintain judicial discipline the present writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to take up his cause before Hon’ble Division Bench, which is already adjudicating the issue in-question.

¶57

It is needless to say that all rights of the petitioner shall be subject to final outcome of adjudication in the matter of Satpal (supra).

¶58

(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J.

¶59

195-198/Nirmala/Sanjay/-

Net Ram v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Net Ram v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jagdish Mali Vs State of Rajasthan

The India Cements Limited Vs the Union of India

Lalit Kishor Vs Jay Narayan Vyas University, Jodhpur

Devi Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Bhavar Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Kala Ashram Foundation, Vs Union of India