Court On Its Own Motion vs State Of H. P.

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2018 Supreme(HP) 995

SANJAY KAROL, AJAY MOHAN GOEL
Court On Its Own Motion – Appellant
Versus
State Of H. P. – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
Ms Vandana Mishra, Amicus Curiae, for the Appellant; Mr. Ashok Sharma, Advocate General, with Mr. M.A. Khan, Mr. Varun Chandel, Additional Advocates General, and Mr. J.K. Vema, Deputy Advocate General, for the State; Mr. Adarsh Kumar Vashista, Advocate, for the Respondent No. 4

JUDGMENT

Sanjay Karol, ACJ. - On the basis of a letter petition, signed by several persons, this Court, taking suo moto cognizance, issued notice.

2. Allegedly, land comprising Khasra Nos. 108, 125 & 133, which is recorded under the ownership of Araji Matruka Bila Alaat as Gair Mumkin Kabrestan, is being encroached upon with the unauthorized construction being raised.

3. On 25.7.2017, this Court passed the following order:

"As per office report, respondent No. 4 stands served, but none has entered appearance on its behalf. SDM, Nurpur is directed to inform the Executing Officer, Municipal Council, Nurpur, about the pendency of present proceedings, who shall also ensure that someone appears on their behalf.

In the meanwhile, we direct SDM, Nurpur to visit the spot i.e. Khasra Nos. 108, 125, 133, village Chogan, Tehsil Nurpur, District Kangra, recorded as Araji Matruka Bila Alaat and Gair Mumkin Kabrestan and ascertain as to whether any illegal construction is being carried out at the graveyard or not. In any event, he shall ensure that the property of the graveyard is protected and no construction/v encroachment of any nature takes place. Affidavit of compliance be positively filed w

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2018 Supreme(HP) 995

SANJAY KAROL, AJAY MOHAN GOELCourt On Its Own Motion – AppellantVersusState Of H. P. – Respondent

SANJAY KAROL, AJAY MOHAN GOEL
Court On Its Own Motion – Appellant
Versus
State Of H. P. – Respondent