Disposed

Ramphool Meena Son of Shri Kajodia Meena v. State of Rajasthan through Its Chief Secretary

Rajasthan HC9 Jan 2024CW/26133/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought directions to remove encroachment from village Balahedi. His representation to the competent authority was still pending; the Court disposed of the petition granting liberty to pursue the representation and directed expeditious decision in accordance with law.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to petitioner to approach competent authority; authority to decide representation expeditiously per law with opportunity of hearing.

Ramphool Meena Son of Shri Kajodia Meena Vs State of… — Property and Title | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 26133/2018

¶3

Ramphool Meena Son Of Shri Kajodia Meena, Aged About 65 Years, Resident Of Village And Post Balahedi, Tehsil Mahuwa, District Dausa (Rajasthan).

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan Through Its Chief Secretary, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶7

The Collector, Dausa, District Dausa

¶8

Sub-Divisional Officer, Mahuwa, District Dausa.

¶9

Tehsildar, Tehsil Mahuwa, District Dausa.

¶10

Village Panchayat, Balahedi Through Its Sarpanch, Village Panchayat Balahedi, Tehsil Mahuwa, District Dausa.

¶11

----Respondents

¶12

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ram Charan Goutam For Respondent(s) : Mr. Akshay Sharma

¶13

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

¶14

fOrder

¶15

09/01/2024

¶16

By way of filing this petition, the petitioner is seeking direction against the respondents – authorities to remove the encroachment from village Balahedi, Tehsil Mahuwa, District Dausa.

¶17

It appears that before approaching this Court, the petitioner has filed a representation before the competent authority for passing appropriate orders thereon but the same has yet not been decided/adjudicated on merits and without waiting for the decision of the competent authority on the said representation, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking above directions.

¶18

(2 of 2) [CW-26133/2018]

¶19

Since the matter is sub-judice before the competent authority, it is expected from the petitioner to approach the competent authority again for deciding the matter on merits.

¶20

With the aforesaid observation, the instant petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent authority for redressal of his grievance.

¶21

In case, any such representation is submitted by the petitioner, the competent authority is expected to decide the same expeditiously as early as possible, strictly in accordance with law after affording the due opportunity of hearing to all the affected parties after following the due process of law.

¶22

Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

¶23

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

¶24

Aayush Sharma/56

Ramphool Meena Son of Shri Kajodia Meena v. State of Rajasthan through Its Chief Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramphool Meena Son of Shri Kajodia Meena v. State of Rajasthan through Its Chief 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

Dkm X-Ray and Diagnostic Centre Vs State of Rajasthan

Chatar Singh Vs Divisional Commissioner Jaipur Ors.

Rishiraj Swami S/O Shri Ram Dayal Swami Vs State of Rajasthan

Harpal Singh S/O Shri Jagdish Prasad Vs State O Rajasthan

Sumitra Bai Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Ram Sahai Memmorial Kalyan Sansthan Vs Project Director, National Highway Authority of India