Division Bench condoned the delay by private respondents in filing a review petition, disposed of the review and the connected contempt proceedings, clarifying that occupants must be given a hearing before eviction.
Review petition and connected contempt petition dismissed; no further orders to be passed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 6/2022
(2 of 4)
[WRW-6/2022]
Versus
----Respondents
Connected With
D.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 266/2019
Bhanwar Singh Gurjar S/o Late Shri Pokhar Mal, Aged About 43 Years, Village Soti, Post Budana, Tehsil And District Jhunjhunu (Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
(3 of 4)
[WRW-6/2022]
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. S.S. Hasan, Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. S. Kashif Hasan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Anil Mehta, AAG with Ms. Archana Mr. M.S. Gurjar
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AKIL KURESHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL
Order
24/02/2022
D.B. Civil Misc. Application No.26/2022 in D.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 6/2022:-
Looking to the fact that review petitioners were not parties to the main petition when the same was disposed delay caused in filing the review petition is condoned. The application stands allowed
D.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 6/2022 and D.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 266/2019:-
This review petition is filed by the private respondents who were not parties to the public interest petition. By an order dated 16.04.2018 the Division Bench disposed of the petition requiring the Collector, Jhunjhunu to ensure that Tehsildar in-charge of the village completes the procedure initiated against the encroachers as per law within six months and the encroachment be removed. Case of the private review petitioners is that they are occupying the land in question since decades. Pattas have been issued in their favour by the authorities. They were not joined as party in
(4 of 4)
[WRW-6/2022]
the public interest petition. Order passed by the Division Bench hurts them. The State Government has filed the review petition since time given for removing encroachment was over and the original petitioner had brought contempt proceedings.
In the order dated 16.04.2018 the Division Bench never meant that the occupants would be removed irrespective of the status and in any case without hearing them. The Court would never have intended to do so since these persons were not joined as parties. A fair reading of the order of the Court and the eventual direction only is that before removing any occupant an opportunity of hearing would be granted.
In view of this, there is no need to pass further orders in the review petition. The review petition stands disposed of.
Since authorities would have to follow the procedure established by law before passing eviction orders, the contempt proceedings also must be closed. The same is disposed of accordingly. All pending applications stand disposed of.
(SUDESH BANSAL),J KAMLESH KUMAR/9-10
(AKIL KURESHI),CJ
3 issues framed by the court
Whether delay by private respondents in filing the review petition should be condoned.
Whether the eviction of land occupants needs to be stayed in light of the fact that they were not part of the original PIL.
Whether the contempt proceedings should be dismissed since the authorities must follow due process before eviction.
Asmat Ali
Hakam Ali
State of Rajasthan, through the Chief Secretary
Sudes Bansal
Akil Kureshi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
