SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2016 Supreme(MP) 790

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BENCH
Vivek Rusia, J.
Jogesh – Petitioner
Versus
Indore Municipal Corporation – Respondent
W.P. 2134 of 2014
Decided On : 26-09-2016

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Shri. A.K. Chitle, Learned Sr. Counsel along with Shri Subhodh Abhyankar, Learned Counsel.
For the Respondent: Shri. Amol Shrivastava, Learned Counsel, Shri. Vijay Sharma, Learned Counsel.

Headnote:

Encroachment - Municipal Corporation Act - Sections 322-A, 307, 293, 15, 57, 318, 320, 322, 322-A - The court discussed the rights and duties of the Municipal Corporation under various provisions of the Municipal Corporation Act, including sections 322-A, 307, and 293. It highlighted the definition of 'public street' and 'street' under the Act, and the duty of the Municipal Corporation to provide and maintain public streets. The court also emphasized the prohibition of projection upon streets and the power of the Municipal Corporation to remove illegal erections or re-erections. The judgment referenced legal principles from the Easement Act, Halsbury's Laws of England, and American Jurisprudence, emphasizing the right of access by adjoining owners and the consequences of interference with such rights. The court also cited a judgment of the Supreme Court to support its interpretation of the Municipal Corporation Act.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought to remove encroachment from a strip of land between his property and the road, citing inconvenience and diminished property value. The respondents justified the encroachment as a green belt area, permitted by the Municipal Corporation.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the encroachment was illegal and without authority under the Municipal Corporation Act. It held that the petitioner had an easementary right to access the road at any point where his property touched it, and that the Municipal Corporation had a duty to maintain the road and remove encroachments.

Issues: The issues revolved around the legality of the encroachment, the rights of the petitioner under the Municipal Corporation Act, and the duty of the Municipal Corporation to maintain public streets.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the interpretation of the Municipal Corporation Act, the rights of adjoining owners, and the duty of the Municipal Corporation to prevent and remove encroachments on public streets.

Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, and the Municipal Corporation was directed to remove the encroachment and all similar encroachments from both sides of the public street in the city. The petitioner was awarded costs of Rs. 10,000.

ORDER :

Vivek Rusia, J.

With the consent of the parties, present petition is heard and decided finally at motion hearing stage.

The petitioner has approached this Court by way of writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs :

(i) A writ, direction or order of or in the nature of Mandamus to compel the respondents to take action to remove encroachment from the entire strip of land indicated in the site plan Annexure-P/1

(ii) A writ, direction or order of or in the nature of Mandamus to compel the respondents to take steps against their municipal staff responsible for allowing the encroachment to take place, consolidate and continue.

2. The petitioner, who is at present residing at Australia, is the owner of the property called "Lantern Hotel" situated between Yashwant Niwas Road and Yashwant Club Road. This property is in the same line as official residential bungalows of the Mayor and the Commissioner of Indore Municipal Corporation and house of respondent no. 8 and 9. In the month of 2013, when the petitioner visited India and came to his property i.e. Lantern Hotel, he found that the vacant portion between his house and the road has been encroached upon by someone. At that time, the petitioner was not aware about, that who and under whose instructions, the area has been encroached by fencing and plantation has been carried out therein. The petitioner has demonstrated the said encroached portion by way of site plan, which is filed as Annexure-P/1 in this petition. As the owner of the property is entitled to ingress from and egress to the public street and to his property vice-versa at every point. The petitioner made complaint to respondent no. 1 to 7 and requested to identify encroacher and called upon him to furnish the authority under which he has made encroachment.

3. The petitioner has described the rights and duties of the Municipal Corporation under the various provisions of the Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 like sections 322-A, 307 and 293 in the notice dated 09/01/2014, and by which, he called upon respondent nos. 1 to 3 for removal of the encroachment. Since no action was taken and the said encroachment is causing inconvenience to the petitioner and diminishing the value of the property, therefore, the petitioner had no option, but to approach this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking directions initially to respondents 1 to 3 to perform their duties as provided under the Municipal Corporation Act.

4. Vide order dated 19/03/2014, considering the seriousness of the matter, notice was issued to the respondents and the Indore Municipal Corporation was directed to take appropriate steps as expeditiously as possible and the Commissioner, Indore Municipal Corporation was directed to file an affidavit in respect of the alleged encroachment of private land as well as over the public street, adjoining to the public street. The order dated 19/03/2014 is reproduced below :

"W.P. No. 2134/2014

19/03/2014

Mr. A.K. Chitale, Sr. Counsel with Mr. S.V. Abhyankar, learned counsel for the petitioner.

Issue notice to the respondents, on payment of PF within seven days, failing which the writ petition shall stand dismissed, without reference to this Court.

Learned Sr. Counsel has vehemently argued before this Court that on account of alleged encroachment, though the petitioner's land has been encroached, the same is resulting in great inconvenience to the public at large as the road is being used by the residents of Indore for a morning walk and for the purposes of jogging. It has been stated that there is no parking space left and persons who are very influential holding a very high position have encroached a part of the public street, which is in front of Yashwant Club Road.

The matter appears to be a very serious matter, keeping in view the allegations made in the writ petition and, therefore, the Commissioner, Indore Municipal Corporation is directed to take an appropriate steps





































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top