MAHESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The hearing of the case was held through video conferencing on account of restricted functioning of the Courts.

(2.) During the preliminary hearing, learned counsel representing the petitioners has disclosed that petitioner no.1 is a Municipal Councillor in Municipal Council, Charkhi Dadri which is a newly formed district headquarter. On account of permanent structures, the major part of a main road which belongs to PWD (B&R) has been encroached upon. It is pleaded that originally the road is 44 feet wide. However, due to encroachments, the width available for traffic has become narrow resulting in chaos and traffic jams.

(3.) In the writ petition, the petitioners have not disclosed the particulars of the road which has been encroached upon, however, from the reading of the writ petition, it becomes apparent that the encroachment is on the land comprised in Khasra Nos.1092 and 1060. A bare perusal of Annexure P-6 shows that the encroachment was found after demarcation of Khasra N0.1060. The petitioners have pleaded that around 5000 to 6000 vehicles pass through the road everyday which has main market on one side, whereas the residential area on the other side. The petitioners claim that the State of Haryana or its officials have failed to take any action.