RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Sangeet Lodha, Manoj Kumar Garg, JJ.
Sawai Ram & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors. - Respondents
Civil Writ Petition No. 13759/2021
Decided On : 04-10-2021
Encroachment - Land Reserved for School - Act Section List - The court emphasized the obligation of authorities to remove encroachments on land reserved for public purposes, referencing guidelines for a systematic approach to address such issues and the principle that regularization of encroachments is an exception.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought removal of encroachments on land reserved for a government school, claiming inaction by the District Collector despite prior representations.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the respondents must address the grievances raised by the petitioners in accordance with established guidelines and legal principles regarding encroachments.
Issues: Whether the respondents are obligated to take action against the encroachment on land reserved for a government school.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that removal of encroachments is mandatory under the law, with regularization being an exception, and emphasized the need for a structured mechanism to handle such complaints.
Result: The writ petition stands dismissed.
JUDGMENT
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners seeking directions to the respondents to remove the encroachment made upon the land comprising Khasra Nos.514/327 and 515/327 of village Mandaliya, Panchayat Samiti- Shiv, District Barmer, which was allotted and reserved for Government school for village Mandaliya, Panchayat Samiti- Shiv, District Barmer.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that despite representation dated 06.07.2021 (Annex.11) being submitted, the District Collector, Barmer has not taken any steps for removal of the encroachment made over the land reserved for school.
The respondents are under an obligation to consider the grievances raised by the petitioners keeping in view the directions issued by this Court in the case of Gulab Kothari (supra) and the directions/guidelines issued by a Coordinate Bench at Jaipur in D.B. Civil Writ (PIL) Petition No.10819/2018 : Jagdish Prasad Meena & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. vide order dated 30.01.2019, which reads as under:
The PLPC aforementioned shall also keep in view the guidelines issued by the Supreme Court in Jagpal Singh & Others v. State of Punjab & Others, (2011) 11 SCC 396 wherein all the State Governments of the country were directed that they should prepare schemes for eviction of illegal/unauthorised occupants of the Gram Sabha/Gram Panchayat/Poramboke/ Shamlat land and the same must be restored to the Gram Sabha/Gram Panchayat for the common use of villagers of the village. The said scheme should provide for the speedy eviction of illegal occupants, after giving them a show cause notice and a brief hearing. It was further held therein that long duration of the illegal encroachment/occupation of land or huge expenditure in making construction thereon or political connections of trespassers are no justification for regularising such illegal occupation. Regularisation should be permitted only in exceptional cases where lease has been granted under some government notification .e.g. to landless labourers or members of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes or where there is already a school, hospital, dispensary, 'shamshan', 'kabristan' or other public utility of the like nature on the land.
Observations of the Supreme Court in Jagpal Singh (supra) thus leave no manner of doubt that removal of encroachment on all such land is a rule and regularisation an exception and that to
Encroachments on public land must be removed as a rule, with regularization only in exceptional cases as per government notification.
The main legal point established is the availability of a suitable remedy for ventilating grievances through the mechanism established by the Division Bench Judgment, involving the submission of repr....
The court established that authorities must prioritize the removal of illegal encroachments on public land, with regularization being a rare exception.
The court established that removal of encroachments is the standard approach, with regularization only permissible in exceptional cases as per government notification.
The court established that encroachment removal is standard practice, with regularization allowed only in exceptional cases as per government notification.
The court emphasized the use of a permanent mechanism, the Public Land Protection Cell (PLPC), to address encroachment issues and directed the petitioner to utilize this mechanism for redressal.
The Court emphasized the need for a permanent mechanism to address encroachments and referred to the guidelines issued by the Supreme Court in Jagpal Singh & Others v. State of Punjab & Others, (2011....
The court emphasized the availability of a suitable remedy for ventilating grievances through the PLPC and directed the petitioner to seek redressal through this mechanism.
The establishment of the Public Land Protection Cell (PLPC) as a mechanism for addressing encroachments and the role of the District Collector in assigning matters to the PLPC for inquiry and decisio....
The establishment of a Public Land Protection Cell (PLPC) in every district to address encroachments on public land and the requirement to follow the guidelines for eviction of illegal occupants of p....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.