KRISHAN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has approached this Court by way of this writ petition (PIL) with the following prayers:-

(2.) Having heard and considered the submissions advanced by counsel representing the petitioner and, having gone through the material available on record, we are of the firm view that the petitioner has available to him a suitable remedy for ventilating his grievances by virtue of the Division Bench Judgment of this Court in the case of Jagdish Prasad Meena and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan and Ors. passed in D.B. Civil Writ Petition (PIL) No.10819/2018 decided on 30/1/2019 wherein this Court directed as below:-

(3.) In order therefore to provide a pan-Rajasthan solution to this ever persisting problem, we deem it appropriate to direct the Chief Secretary of the State to devise a permanent mechanism, which should be operational in every District of the State where the concerned District Collector should be required to periodically notify for the information of the general public to lodge the complaints/representations with regard to such encroachments with a specially designated Public Land Protection Cell (for short 'PLPC') for rural areas. The PLPC should be headed by District Collector and function under his direction and supervision. The PLPC shall get such complaints/representations enquired into by deputing concerned Sub DivisionalOfficer/Tehsildar/Naib Tehsildar so as to verify whether or not such encroachments have actually taken place on such land. If the allegations are found to be substantiated, appropriate steps in accordance with law be immediately taken for removal of the encroachments and appropriate penal action be also taken against the trespassers. The complaints/representations received in the PLPC should be decided by passing speaking order, informing the respective complainant/representationist about the action taken. This would obviate the necessity of such complainants/ representationists approaching this Court directly by way of public interest litigation. If this practice is put in place, this Court would not be inclined to directly entertain such public interest litigation or would do so only in the event of inaction on the part of the concerned PLPC. The PLPC aforementioned shall also keep in view the guidelines issued by the Supreme Court in Jagpal Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Others, 2011 11 SCC 396 wherein all the State Governments of the country were directed that they should prepare schemes for eviction of illegal/ unauthorised occupants of the Gram Sabha/GramPanchayat/Poramboke/ Shamlat land and the same must be restored to the Gram Sabha/Gram Panchayat for the common use of villagers of the village. The said scheme should provide for the speedy eviction of such illegal occupants, after giving them a showcause notice and a brief hearing. It was further held therein that long duration of the illegal encroachment/occupation of land or huge expenditure in making construction thereon or political connections of trespassers are no justification for regularising such illegal occupation. Regularisation should be permitted only in exceptional cases where lease has been granted under some government notification e.g. to landless labourers or members of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes or where there is already a school, hospital, dispensary, 'shamshan', 'kabristan' or other public utility of the like nature on the land.