PUNJABHAI MALDEBHAI KARENA Vs. BHANVAD MUNICIPALITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IT is a case in itself an example to show how the people takes the law in their own hands and that to the extent of making encroachment on the land belonging to the Government or Municipality. Not only this they raised construction on the land and more so, in this case a commercial shop and then took steps and tried to pursue Municipality to regularize their encroachment and illegally and unauthorized construction was made by them on the land in dispute. From the facts of this case, it also transpires that the officers of the Municipality also favours the encroachers and have tried to make out a picture as if the Municipality is willing to regularize this encroachment. This tendency of the people is increasing in the country. IT is not unknown that the people are making encroachments on the public roads and lands which are set for public purposes. The land in dispute on which the encroachment has admittedly been made by the petitioner is a valuable land and in case, it also appears from the fact of this case, it is put to public auction it would have fetch handsome amount. Looking to the location of the land it is certainly a valuable land. This land is lying vacant in between land of the petitioners and the road and the petitioners have already put construction of shop on their land but not contended with it but still they encroached on the land of the State Government or the Municipality whatever it may be and raised the construction of the shops. The worst part of the game is that these encroachers have approached the Court for seeking the relief under its discretionary power under equitable jurisdiction. The construction has been put and when action has been taken by the Municipality for demolition thereof they have come to the Court for protection of their illegal construction put on the land on which they made the encroachment admittedly. The Courts below have not committed any illegality or error declined to grant the temporary injunction. I am fully in agreement with the Courts below that in case the temporary injunction is granted and the protection is given to the petitioners, who admittedly made encroachment on the land of the Stale or the Municipality it will perpetuate a legality. I am constrained to observe that in many cases it is not unknow that the civil Courts are protecting the land grabbers and that gives encouragement the class of this persons, which is ultimately not in the interest of the country. Be that it may. I am sitting under revisional jurisdiction and after going through the orders of the Courts below I am satisfied that the petitioners deserves no indulgence and in fact they deserves to be punished severely by the Courts but as the matter is only in a suit filed by them for permanent injunction and what the Court could have done minimum has been done in the present case. The Courts below have rightly observed that no protection can be given to the person who is not law abiding and who is doing nothing but only grabbing of the public land. The learned counsel for the petitioner has tried to create a confusion before this Court that the Municipality has taken steps to regularize the encroachment made by the petitioners on the land in dispute. However, I do not find any resolution on the record of this civil revision application of the municipalities regularizing their encroachment. A document has been referred. That is a letter written by the Chief Officer of the Municipality Town Planning Department dated 9.4.1997 but from which it is very difficult to accept that the Municipality has taken any decision to regularize the encroachment. Moreover the Municipality has not regularized the encroachment. If it would have regularized such encroachment a valuable land will go in the hands of the land grabbers. IT will be very easy then for the land grabbers to get the land in throw away price by their muscles or money power. The letter dated 9.4.1998 of the Chief Officer also appears to be in the series of the possible favouritism sought to be extended to the petitioner by none other than the authorities of the Municipality. I have gone through the contents of the reply affidavit of the Municipality in civil revision application and I find there from that in case this land is put to auction it will fetch about Rs. 30 lacs. There are the numbers of complaints made against the petitioners against their action of making of the encroachment on the State Government or Municipality land and further raising the construction thereon. IT is true that the action has been initiated for demolition of the shops illegally constructed on this land by the Municipality but I am constrained to observe that this action has been initiated at a very late stage.I fail to see why the officers of the Municipality, who are highly paid, are not able to stop the encroachment made by the land grabbers at its initial stage. They permitted the people to make the encroachment on the lands and not only that further permitted them to go to the extent of raising of the illegal and unauthorized construction and when everything has been done then only then are awakened on the complaint received by the peoples. The action of the officers then seems to be only of their skin saving. They make it easy for the encroachers but ultimately put the Courts in a position where they have to be protected. This is a serious matter and the Collector of the District also should not have felt contended and satisfied by writing the letters here or there. But when this encroachment has been brought to his notice he should have taken strict action in the matter and should have seen that the encroachment is not only demolition but the persons who has made encroachment and raised illegal construction should be appropriately punished. The action should have also been taken against those officers who are involved in the matter and prompting the land grabbers to make the encroachment on the land and raise the construction thereon. I do not find anything in favour of the petitioners in this case. IT is for the Municipality and the Collector of the district concerned to take appropriate action and see that this illegal construction is removed and demolished and the land is taken back from the encroachers. In case any action has been taken or is in process for regularization of this land in favour of the petitioners it is made clear that it is the peoples land and it has to be put to auction only and whosoever pays maximum price may be given the same and price received should be used for welfare and benefits of the public. In case it is to be put to for some public purpose it may be put for the same. But encroachment should be removed in all eventualities. Otherwise also, if the protection is granted by the civil Court to the encroachers of the Government or Municipality land, it will certainly gives a bad name. Such persons who are the law breakers, , and grabbers and manipulators should be severely dealt with not only by the Courts but by the authorities and executives of the state also. In the result, this revision application fails and the same is dismissed with costs, which is quantified at Rs. 2,000/-. Copy of this judgment be sent to the District Collector, Jamnagar.