Rajasthan High Court Restrains Railways From Building Boundary Wall in Front of Jaipur Plot

The High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Bench at Jaipur has temporarily barred the Railways from continuing construction work in front of a private commercial plot in Jaipur. Justice Anand Sharma passed the interim restraint order on August 5, 2026 , in a writ petition filed by Avin Agarwal, who claims to be the owner and possessor of the land in question.

The order restrains the Railways from raising construction in front of Plot No. C-27, Raghunandan Enclave-D, Village Nanakpura, Tehsil-Sanganer, District Jaipur . The matter will now be heard again on August 21, 2026.

A Road Promised in a Registered Lease

The dispute arises from a registered lease deed dated October 26, 2015 , issued by the Jaipur Development Authority for a plot intended for commercial use. According to the petitioners, the lease deed and the approved site plan show a 200-feet-wide road on the eastern side of the plot.

This road, the petitioner argued, is essential to maintaining access to the demised premises. The petitioner contended that the Railways began raising the boundary wall "without following due process of law " and that the unfinished wall threatened to completely obstruct entry and exit from the plot as shown in the site plan.

Railways Seeks Time as Court Steps Inman

During the hearing, counsel for the Union of India, appearing for the Railways, sought time to file a formal reply to the writ petition. No substantive defence was advanced at this stage, and no counter-affidavit was on record.

Taking the interim arguments on board, the Court directed that the railway authorities should not proceed with construction in the disputed area in the meantime.

"In the meanwhile, the respondent- Railways is restrained from raising any construction in front of Plot No.C-27 situated in Ragganandan Enclave-D, Village Nanakpura, Tehsil-Sanganer, District-Jaipur, owned and possessed by the petitioner."

Balancing public Works And Private Rights

Because the case is at an interim stage, the Court has not yet adjudicated on the final status of the road or whether the Railways was legally entitled to build on the land. The temporary order is essentially a protective mechanism to preserve the existing state of affairs until the Railways files its reply.

Read legally, the interim relief rests on the weight of the petitioner's prima facie title and the rationality of the highway claim: if access to a clearly shown road is shut off during the pendency of this project, the commercial utility of the plot could be severely and irreversibly damaged.

The Court did not cite external precedents in this interim order, which is as common at the stage when the merits have yet to be addressed. The Railway has not yet had the opportunity to lay its response. Individual legal issues relating to the validity of the wall, the true alignment of the road and the actual effect of any proposed construction will bright to the front when the reply is filed and the bench takes up the matter on merit.

What Happens Next

The interim injunction is limited in scope: it prevents construction the front of the plot but does not decide the larger competing claims of the Railways and the petitioner. Unless vacated or modified by the Courts on the next listing, this temporary restraint will remain in force while the case progresses.

With the Railway Administration now required to justify its interference, the case will quickly become a useful lesson on the interface of public infrastructure projects and private property access rights. For the petitioner, the immediate threat Main is halted — although the legal road ahead remains filled with a 200-foot claim that still needs to be settled in court.