PREMCHAND Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved against issuance of notice Annex. -1 by the Gram Panchayat purportedly under Rule 165(3) of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996. It is, inter -alia, contended in the petition that the petitioner has raised construction on this patta sud land and the notice issued by the respondents is only on account of personal vendetta on part of the persons of the panchayat samiti and a look at the notice clearly indicates that the Gram Panchayat has issued the notice with a pre -determined notion alleging the petitioner to have trespassed on a public land, which is factually incorrect. It is claimed that the petitioner is in possession of the land as per his patta, wherein his shop was existing since issuance of patta in the year 1988 and the petitioner is undertaking the reconstruction of the shop on the same site, therefore, it cannot be said that the petitioner has trespassed on public land.

(2.) The respondents have appeared on caveat.

(3.) It is submitted by learned counsel for the respondents that the petition filed by the petitioner is not maintainable for more than one reason. The petition has been filed against a show cause notice without even responding to the notice; the action of the respondents is open to appeal under Sec. 61 and/or revision under Sec. 97 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 ('the Act') and the petitioner in view of the availability of alternative remedy is not entitled to invoke extra -ordinary jurisdiction of this Court; the respondents have undertaken the procedure as required under Rule 165 of the Rules and only after prima facie coming to the conclusion that the petitioner has trespassed on the public land that the notice has been issued.