AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.
Mr. Sandeep Singh Rawat (through V.C.) and Mr. Navneet Singh, Advocates for the petitioner.
Mr. Atul Bhatt, Standing Counsel for the Union of India.
Petitioner runs a eatery (dhaba) at Rishikesh-Joshimat-Mana National Highway. A notice was issued against the petitioner, whereby he was asked to remove the unauthorized structure raised by him over National Highway land, failing which the same shall be removed by the authorities. Feeling aggrieved by the said notice, petitioner has approached this Court, seeking the following relief:-
“i.Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ thereby directing and commanding the respondent nos. 1 and 2 not to remove the Dhaba of the petitioner.”
Learned counsel for petitioner submits that dhaba is being run by petitioner since last more than ten years and that is the only source of livelihood to the petitioner, therefore, the manner in which petitioner has been asked to remove the dhaba, is illegal. It is further contended that respondent no. 2 is not competent to issue such notice and only District Magistrate is competent to issue such notice.
Mr. Atul Bhatt, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents was given time to get instructions. On instructions, he submits that Hon’ble Supreme Court in Suo Moto Writ Petition (Civil) No. 9 of 2025 (In Re: Phalodi Accident v. National Highways Authority of India and others) has issued certain directions to prevent fatal accidents on National Highways. He has drawn attention of this Court to para no. 4 (b) (ii) and 4 (c) of the said, which is extracted below:-
“4.b) (ii) State-wise encroachments identified, notices issued under Section 26 of the Control of National Highways (Land and Traffic) Act, 2002 – CNH Act and structures demolished.
c)Encroachment Prohibition and Removal – Construction/operation of any new dhaba, eatery, or commercial structure within the Right of Way (ROW) of any National Highway is prohibited with immediate effect. District Magistrates shall enforce demolition/removal of all new or existing unauthorised structures within 60 days, in terms of the CNH Act procedure and SOP dated 07.08.2025.”
Thus, he submits that since the construction raised by petitioner on National Highways was likely to cause threat to life of road using public, therefore, petitioner was asked to remove the structure, in terms of direction issued by Hon’ble Supreme Court.
This Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter, as it is for the petitioner to establish that the structure is not standing over National Highways, but it stands on a land belonging to petitioner or some other individual.
Having regard to the facts of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to petitioner to give reply to respondent no. 2 enclosing all necessary documents, which support his claim that he has not made any encroachment over National Highway land. If petitioner submits such reply, respondent no. 2 shall take decision thereupon, as per law, within two weeks thereafter. For a period of three weeks or till decision is taken by respondent no. 2, status quo as regards petitioner’s possession shall be maintained.