Sunita Devi vs Union Of India And Others

Sandeep Sharma, J

By way of present petition prayer has been made on behalf of petitioner for issuance of a writ of mandamus to the respondents Nos. 7 to 10 to lift the debris illegally dumped by them on her land i.e. Khasra No. 576/431/2005 measuring 1-12 Bigha situate at Mauja Sanwara and restore the same to its original condition.

Prima facie, having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record, this Court is convinced and satisfied that the present petition is not maintainable, because, disputed questions of law and facts are involved in the case. Though in the instant petition, petitioner has claimed that respondents Nos. 7 to 10 have illegally/unauthorizedly dumped debris/muck on her plot but perusal of reply filed on behalf of respondents Nos. 2, 4 and 7 clearly reveals that prior to filing of the petition at hand, petitioner had also lodged complaint with police, wherein she specifically admitted that her husband had consented for dumping of debris/muck on her plot but after construction of retaining wall. Annexures R-1 to R-3, annexed with the reply filed by respondents Nos. 2 and 4 clearly reveals that the respondent No. 7 while carrying construction activity threw debris/muck on the land of petitioner on the askance of her husband. There is nothing on record that debris/muck, if any, on the land of petitioner came to be thrown by the respondents Nos. 7 to 10 of their own without taking consent of petitioner, rather, statements having been taken note above, suggest that prior to throwing debris/muck on the land of the petitioner, respondents Nos. 7 to 10 had assured the petitioner to raise retaining wall but this is a disputed question, which cannot be gone into in the instant proceedings. The question, whether aforesaid respondents had agreed to construct retaining wall before throwing debris/muck being disputed question, needs to be proved in accordance with law by filing appropriate proceedings in the appropriate court of law.

Consequently, in view of above, present petition is dismissed being devoid of merit. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to file appropriate proceedings in the appropriate court of law for redressal of her grievance. Needless to say, Police authorities would deal with the complaint lodged by the petitioner, in accordance with law. Plea of limitation shall not come in the way of petitioner seeking appropriate remedy in accordance with law.

Petition stands accordingly disposed of alongwith all pending applications, if any.