Disposed

Jailaram v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC21 Aug 2024CW/13455/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan directed the Collector to decide a pending representation regarding the petitioner's possession of pattasud land. Pending such decision, the petitioner shall not be dispossessed, while allowing the Collector to proceed against him if he is found to be an encroacher. Stay petitions were disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner to be preserved against dispossession until the Collector decides the pending representation regarding land possession; stay petitions disposed of.

Jailaram Vs State of Rajasthan — Land Acquisition | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:34399]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13455/2024

¶4

Jailaram S/o Sh. Birbalram, Aged About 75 Years, R/o Chamarkhera, Tehsil Sadulshahar, Dist. Sri Ganganagar.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Collector, Sri Ganganagar. 2. Gram Panchayat, Hakmabad, Panchayat Samiti, Sadulshahar, Dist. Sri Ganganagar, Through Gram Secretary, Gram Panchayat, Hakamabad.

¶8

Ramchander S/o Sh. Ranjeet Ram, R/o Chamarkhera Ward No. 15, Sadulshahar, Dist. Sri Ganganagar.

¶9

Hetram S/o Sh. Ranjeet Ram, R/o Ward No. 1, Chamar Khera, 32 Ksd, Bhudarwali, Sadulshahar, Dist Sri Ganganagar.

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. V.K. Bhadu

¶12

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

¶13

Order

¶14

21/08/2024

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in pursuance to the order dated 19.10.2023 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.17075/2023, a representation was moved before the Public Land Protection Cell (PLPC) by the petitioners therein and in pursuance to the same, notice was served on the present petitioner to remove the encroachment on the government land.

¶16

In response to the said notice, a reply was submitted by the petitioner with a specific averment that he was in possession of his pattasud land. However without considering the said reply and

(2 of 2)

[2024:RJ-JD:34399]

[CW-13455/2024]

without any decision thereupon, the respondents are bent upon to dispossess the petitioner.

¶21

Counsel submits that a representation had been furnished by the petitioner to the Collector but the same is of no avail. 4. In view of the submissions made, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to Collector, Ganganagar to decide the representation dated 15.07.2024 (Annex.7) as filed by the petitioner.

¶22

Till the said representation is decided/decision in the proceedings as registered in pursuance to the order dated 19.10.2023 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.17075/2023 is taken, the petitioner shall not be dispossessed. However, if the Collector/Public Land Protection Cell (PLPC) reaches to a conclusion that the petitioner is an encroacher, he/it would be at liberty to direct/proceed further in accordance with law.

¶23

Stay petition and all pending applications, if any, stand disposed of .

¶24

(REKHA BORANA),J

¶25

32-AbhishekK/-

Jailaram v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jailaram 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shree Arya Samaj Vs Bherulal

Jai Singh Vs State of Raj. and Anr.

Pawan Kumar Vs State Transport Appe. Trib., and Ors.

SBI General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Manish Vagoriya

Mangal Chand Vs State and Ors.

Lachhu Alias Lakshman Gurjar Vs Kailashi Gurjar