Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Raj) 19211
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
Mukesh Rajpurohit, J
Liladhyar – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 23994/2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Liladhyar
The court granted interim protection against demolition of a property, pending determination of whether the Urban Improvement Trust has territorial jurisdiction over rural areas and whether the action violated principles of natural justice due to lack of notice.
Headnote:(A) Property Law - Demolition of Structure - Territorial Jurisdiction - Action taken by Urban Improvement Trust on property allegedly situated within rural limits of Gram Panchayat is challenged on grounds of lack of jurisdiction.
(B) Natural Justice - Right to be Heard - Issuance of Notice - Demolition action undertaken without prior notice or opportunity of hearing is contested as an infringement of due process.
Issues: Whether the respondent Urban Improvement Trust has the jurisdiction to demolish the property and whether such action without notice is legally sustainable.
Legal Category Hierarchy
-
administrative law
-
judicial review
- demolition without notice
-
natural justice
- right to hearing
-
judicial review
-
practice and procedure
-
interim orders
- stay of demolition
-
jurisdiction
- territorial jurisdiction
-
interim orders
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUKESH RAJPUROHIT
Order
26/09/2026
The petitioner, present in person, submits that he is in settled possession of the property in question, situated at Gram 3 A Choti, Murabba No.41, Killa No.6, Sahuwala, Sriganganagar. He submits that a substantial portion of the residential structure standing over the said property has already been demolished by the respondent–Urban Improvement Trust, Sriganganagar, and that the respondents are presently proceeding to demolish the remaining portion thereof.
He further submits that the property in question falls within the rural limits of Gram Panchayat, Sahuwala, and is not within the territorial jurisdiction of the respondent–UIT. It is contended that the demolition action has been undertaken without issuance of any notice or affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and without disclosing any authority under which the respondent–UIT has undertaken such action.
The matter requires consideration.
Issue notice to the respondents, returnable within a period of four weeks.
In the meanwhile, and till the next date of hearing, the respondents shall not take any coercive action, including demolition, in respect of the subject property/land in question.
