SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
NARENDRA SINGH KHICHI SON OF LATE SHRI RAM SINGH KHICHI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
WMAP 139/2019



Advocates:
['RAJAT RANJAN', 'ANIL MEHTA AAG', '', 'M L SHARMA', 'AMIT KURI', 'DEVENDRA SINGH RAGHAVA', 'INTJAR ALI', 'NAINA SARAF']

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Writ Miscellaneous Application No. 139/2019

Narendra Singh Khichi Son Of Late Shri Ram Singh Khichi,

Resident Of Plot No. 14, Ganesh Colony, Near Imliwala Phatak,

Jaipur (Raj.)

----Petitioner

Versus

1.

State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Urban

Department, Secretariat, Jaipur.

2.

The Chief Executive Officer, Nagar Nigam Tonk Road,

Jaipur.

3.

The Commissioner, Jaipur Nagar Nigam Tonk Road, Jaipur.

4.

The Commissioner, Jaipur Development Authority, Jaipur.

5.

Shri Vijay Kumar Sharma @ Mamaji Builder, R/o 129-130,

Janakpuri, Near Imliwala Phatak, Jaipur.

6.

Senior Divisional Engineer, H.Q. North Western Railway,

Zone Jaipur.

7.

Smt. Deepa Vijay Wife Of Ashok Vijay,

8.

Shri Ashok Vijay Son Of Shri Prayagraj Vijay,

Both resident Of Plot No. 9, Ganesh Colony, Near Imliwala

Phatak, Jaipur.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mr. M.M. Ranjan, Senior Advocate

with Mr. Daulat Sharma, Adv.

For Respondent(s)

:

Mr. Anil Mehta, Additional Advocate

General with Mr. Yashodhar Pandey,

Adv.,

Mr. Amit Kuri, Adv. with Mr. Vikram

Sharma, Adv. & Ms. Aditi Jodha, Adv.,

Dharma Ram, Adv. for JDA

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR GAUR

Order

23/03/2022

(2 of 7)

[WMAP-139/2019]

Matter comes up for considering the application filed by the 5

applicants for recalling the order dated 19.05.2017 passed by this

Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8106/2009 along with S.B. Civil

Writ Petition No.14948/2009, decided by the common order.

Learned Senior Counsel for the applicants submitted that the

applicants are residents of Ganesh Colony, Arjun Nagar, Mahesh

Colony, Natraj Nagar, Telephone Colony, Barkat Nagar, Radha

Krishan Nagar, Arujunpuri and other nearby colonies and they are

near the Railway Line leading from 22 Godown (Ganda Nala to

Tonk Phatak) Jaipur.

Learned Senior Counsel for the applicants submitted that the

applicants are plot holders and they have constructed their

houses.

Learned Senior Counsel for the applicants submitted that the

JDA has also allotted plots to certain applicants and as such they

are in legal possession and have title over the plots.

Learned Senior Counsel for the applicants submitted that

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8106/2009 was filed before this Court

by the petitioner Narendra Singh Khinchi whereby he had prayed

for issuing direction to the official respondents to remove illegal

construction and structure said to be made by the private

respondent No.5 in the writ petition-Mr. Vijay Kumar Sharma.

Learned Senior Counsel for the applicants submitted that the

petitioner had raised grievance in respect of only one person and

strict legal action was sought against the said private respondent

in the writ petition.

Learned Senior Counsel for the applicants submitted that this

Court while passing the order dated 19.05.2017, has given

(3 of 7)

[WMAP-139/2019]

direction to remove encroachment said to be existing between the

Railway Track and Mahesh Colony.

Learned Senior Counsel for the applicants submitted that the

respondent-Jaipur Development Authority (hereinafter referred to

as ‘the JDA’) was given opportunity to give notice under Sections

32 & 72 of the Jaipur Development Authority Act, 1982

(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act of 1982’) and compliance of the

order passed in the case of Gulab Kothari & Ors. Versus State

of Rajasthan & Ors. (D.B. Civil Writ Petition [PIL]

No.1554/2004), was also required to be ensured.

Learned Senior Counsel for the applicants submitted that

while passing the order, this Court gave direction to remove all

encroachments against all the similarly placed persons without

discrimination and further found that no opportunity was required

to be given to such encroachers except by issuing notice under

Sections 32 & 72 of the Act of 1982.

Learned Senior Counsel for the applicants submitted that the

applicants who are ha

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top