Mahavir vs Deputy Commissioner-cum-Commissioner, Municipal Corporation and Others

Rakesh Kumar Jain, J.—The petitioner has prayed for a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents No. 1 and 2 to carry out necessary demarcation of the Gali measuring 11 feet leading to Phirni so as to find out the unauthorized occupation on the Gali, allegedly by the private respondents No. 3 to 8, and for further direction to respondents No. 1 & 2 to remove unauthorized construction/encroachment. The case set up by the petitioner is that he is Ex-Sarpanch of village Ajijulapur, District Panipat. The Gram Panchayat issued show cause notice u/s 24(1) of the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 to private respondents on the issue that they have unauthorisedly encroached upon the land of the Gram Panchayat. Thereafter under the orders of the Assistant Collector, IInd Grade, Panipat, the land was got demarcated through one retired Naib Tehsildar, who had found private respondents to be in unauthorised possession. It is alleged that the unauthorised possession of the private respondents were got removed under the orders of the Deputy Commissioner, Panipat dated 19.6.2001 but again they entered into the possession unauthorisedly and are still continuing therein.

After notice, learned counsel for respondents No. 1 & 2 has submitted that they have already written to the Tehsildar for the purpose of demarcation whereas learned counsel for the private respondents has submitted that they are not in unauthorised possession over the land in dispute much less the Phirni of the village and the demarcation report in their absence is meaningless. He has submitted that fresh demarcation may be ordered to be carried out after associating them as well.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he has no objection if fresh demarcation is carried out under the orders of this Court and if private respondents are still found to be in unauthorised possession, the possession be taken forthwith from them because the positive stand of the private respondents before this Court is that they are not in unauthorised possession and if they are found to be in unauthorised possession then the private respondents would not have any grievance if the unauthorised possession is removed. In view of the aforesaid, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Deputy Commissioner, Panipat to conduct demarcation of the land in dispute through Tehsildar, after taking into account revenue record and associating both the petitioner as well as the private respondents. It is further directed that in case, it is found in the demarcation report that private respondents are in unauthorised possession, 15 days time may be given to them for removing their possession.