Disposed

Mohani Devi v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC21 May 2024CW/3680/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought removal of encroachment and possession of regularized plot No.B-125. Court found petitioner entitled to possession but directed Superintendent of Police to provide force for removal due to law and order issues, mandating disposal within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed Superintendent of Police, Jaisalmer to provide force for removal of encroachment and handing over possession within six weeks; disposal of stay petitions.

Mohani Devi Vs State of Rajasthan — Property and Title | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:22878]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3680/2024

¶4

Mohani Devi W/o Sangtaram, Aged About 55 Years, Resident Of Geeta Aashram, Kachhi Basti, Jaisalmer (Raj.).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Local Self Department, Jaipur (Raj.).

¶8

Municipal Council, Jaisalmer, Through Its Commissioner.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Paramveer Singh Champawat For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajesh Parihar

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR Order

¶12

21/05/2024

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶14

The present writ petition has been filed with a prayer that the encroachment made over the plot No.B-125 of the petitioner be removed and the possession of the same may be handed over to the petitioner. Further, the petitioner is seeking a direction from the Municipal Council, Jaisalmer to issue a patta / lease deed of plot No.B-125 in favour of the petitioner.

¶15

Briefly noted the facts in the present writ petition are that the petitioner was in possession of a plot being Plot No.B-125 situated in Geeta Ashram, Kachi Basti, Jaisalmer and since he was in possession of the plot for a long time, therefore, the same was regularized by the respondents vide order dated 30.01.2004. The possession of the petitioner was forcefully taken by one Bhanwaruram S/o Magaram and a dispute arose between the

¶16

[2024:RJ-JD:22878]

¶17

petitioner and Bhanwaruram which led to the filing of a civil suit which was ultimately decided in favour of the petitioner vide order dated 15.12.2008. Thereafter, an appeal was filed by Bhanwaruram and the same was also dismissed vide order dated 01.08.2016. Against the appellate order dated 01.08.2016, Bhanwaruram filed a second appeal before this Court and the same was also dismissed vide order dated 03.10.2018.

¶18

In these circumstances, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed multiple representations before the respondent-authorities for handing over the possession of the land in question after getting it free from the encroachment but no effective action has been taken by the official respondents till date. The Deputy Director, Local Self Department has also issued a communication to the respondents for removal of the encroachment and handing over the possession of Plot No.B-125 to the petitioner but despite the correspondence having been done from the higher authorities, the possession of the plot in question has not been handed over to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner, therefore, prays that the respondents may be directed to take effective measures for handing over the vacant and peaceful possession of the Plot No.B125 to the petitioner.

¶19

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents has not disputed the factual averments made in the writ petition and the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, however, he has expressed inability of the respondents to hand over the peaceful and vacant possession of the plot in question to the petitioner. Whenever, the attempts have been made to go and get

¶20

[2024:RJ-JD:22878]

¶21

the possession of the plot in question, the person who is in occupation of the plot has raised the law and order situation. Learned counsel further submits that they are trying their best to hand over the possession of the plot in question to the petitioner. He therefore, prays that a direction may be issued to the concerned Superintendent of Police to provide requisite police force to the respondents for handing over the possession to the petitioner.

¶22

I have considered the submissions made at the Bar and have gone through the relevant records of the case. 7. The undisputed fact of the matter shows that the petitioner was having the possession of Plot No.B-125 situated in Geeta Ashram, Kachi Basti, Jiasalmer which was regularized by the respondents and on a dispute having arose between the petitioner and one Bhanwaruram, the matter was finally decided in favour of the petitioner by this Court while deciding the second appeal of preferred by Bhanwaruram. In these circumstances, the petitioner is entitled to get the possession of the plot No.B-125 and the respondents are under an obligation to hand over the peaceful possession of the plot in question after getting it free from the encroachment.

¶23

Since, the learned counsel for the respondents very fairly submitted that they have made all out efforts to get the peaceful possession of the plot in question but because of the law and order situation created by the person who is in possession of the said plot, they are unable to get the peaceful possession of the plot in question and hand over the same to the petitioner.

¶24

[2024:RJ-JD:22878]

¶25

Considering the above facts and circumstances, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Superintendent of Police, Jaisalmer, to provide the requisite police force as and when required by the respondents for removal of the encroachment and getting the peaceful possession of the plot No.B-125 situated in Geeta Ashram, Kachi Basti, Jaisalmer, and handing over the same to the petitioner. The respondents will undertake the above stated exercise at the earliest, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, strictly in accordance with law.

¶26

Stay petition as well as other pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.

¶27

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J

¶28

9-/Arun P/-

Mohani Devi v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohani Devi 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

Narayan Lal Sagar Vs Raj. Bhoodan Yagna Board and Ors.

Devikot Gaushala Vs State of Rajasthan

Om Prakash Arora Vs State of Rajasthan

Umesh Vs State of Rajasthan

Shiv Shankar Goyal Vs State of Rajasthan

Kailashibai Vs State of Rajasthan