[2026:RJ-JP:5117]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1913/2026 Dhanmat Khan S/o Shri Fattu Khan, Aged About 64 Years, R/o Laxmangarh Alwar Rajasthan ----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary Department Of Local Self Government, Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur Rajasthan.

2. The Principal Secretary, Public Works, Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat Jaipur Rajasthan

3. Director Directorate Of Local Bodies, G-3, Rajmahal Residency Area, Civil Lines Phatak, C-Scheme Jaipur Rajasthan

4. Chief Engineer, Public Works Department, Nirman Bhawan, Jacob Road, Civil Lines, Jaipur, Rajasthan

5. Assistant Engineer Public Works Department, Laxmangarh Alwar, Rajasthan

6. Municipal Board Laxmangarh, Alwar, Rajasthan Through Its Executive Officer.

----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Girish Khandelwal HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUROOP SINGHI

Order

02/02/2026

1. The present writ petition has been filed assailing the notice dated 19.01.2026 issued by Municipal Board, Laxmangarh, Alwar, under Section 245 of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 2009, as per which, a portion of the construction raised by the petitioner falls within the right of way for the purposes of construction of road and thus, after holding the said portion of construction to be an encroachment, the petitioner has been directed to remove the said encroachment, failing which, the respondents will remove the same at the risk and cost of the petitioner.

2. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner has not made any encroachment whatsoever and the part of construction as mentioned in the impugned notice is under exclusive title and possession of the petitioner on the basis of valid title documents issued in his favour. Thus, under no circumstances, the petitioner could have been held as an encroacher and the construction made by him could be demolished. Learned counsel further submits that in response to the notice dated 19.01.2026, a reply dated 21.01.2026 has already been submitted by him before the respondents, however, in sheer ignorance of the same, the respondents are proceeding ahead with the impugned notice and are not paying any heed to the documents submitted by the petitioner which demonstrates his rightful title and ownership over the said plot.

3. Taking note of the above it would be in the fitness of things to dispose of the present writ petition with the following directions :

i. Since, as a response to the impugned notice dated 19.01.2026, the petitioner has already submitted his reply dated 21.01.2026 alongwith the several title documents and no decision has been taken by the respondent on the same till date, the respondents are directed not to proceed further with any demolition in pursuance to the notice dated

19.01.2026;

ii. In addition to the reply and documents already filed, the petitioner would be at liberty to submit his representation alongwith any additional relevant documents pertaining to his rights and title over the land in question before the respondent authorities within a period of ten days from the date of this order, i.e. 02.02.2026;

iii. The respondents shall consider and decide the representation of the petitioner alongwith the annexed documents within a period of thirty days from the date of this order, only after granting the petitioner due opportunity of hearing, strictly in accordance with law, by passing a reasoned and speaking order;

iv. In the event, the respondents arrive at a decision that the petitioner has a valid title over the land on which the construction as mentioned in the order dated 19.01.2026 is raised, and the said land is required for widening of the road, it would be open for the respondents to acquire the same by following due process of law and awarding adequate compensation to the petitioner or in the alternative, by mutually negotiating the compensation for the same or by any other mutually agreed terms;

v. In case the respond