Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 120 (UTT)

Yashpal Singh v. State of Uttarakhand

2016-03-08

K.M.JOSEPH, V.K.BIST

body2016
JUDGMENT : K.M. Jospeh, J. This writ petition has been filed as public interest litigation to stop the illegal constructions on public utility land, namely, land reserved for Panchayat Ghar, manure pits, water bodies (pond) of village Dausnee, Tehsil Laksar, District Haridwar. The constructions are alleged to have been raised by respondent nos. 5 to 9. It is accordingly that the relief is sought by the petitioner. 2. Apart from the compliance affidavit filed on behalf of respondent no. 3, we notice that a counter affidavit was filed by respondent no. 3, which is the latest of the affidavits in the matter. It is dated 19.05.2014. To the same, there is no rejoinder affidavit. 3. In the said counter affidavit, the third respondent, who is the S.D.M, Laksar has stated, inter alia, as follows: “B. That it is most respectfully submitted that since a report from the concerned Lekhpal was called on the issue of construction of Nali, and further team of Engineers have also been sent to submit the report, but the appropriate decision for the affective construction of Nalis could not be made and, hence, the Sub Divisional Magistrate along with all other concerned staff as well as Engineers, had himself visited the village and after hearing all the concerned parties, had made a consensus amongst the villagers, wherein instead of constructing a huge Nala adjacent to path of village, the Nala had been reduced to eight inches Nali and further other Nalis have been constructed in the village and some of them have been diverted to the pond as per their natural slope and on the basis of the consensus, so arrived, a Nali adjacent to path as well as the nail within the village, whereby some drainage were led to the pond, had been constructed. The Nalis have now been constructed and are serving the purpose. The Nalis have now been constructed and are serving the purpose. D. That it is most respectfully submitted that the manure pits, had been recorded in Khasra No. 58 and in the said portion of the land, the petitioner himself, had encroached the said land and apart from the petitioner, Sri Jaswant Singh, S/o Sauram, Sri Jai Kumar S/o Data Ram, Sri Neetu S/o Banwari and Sri Mani Ram S/o Sri Kabool, had unauthorizedly occupied the said land recorded in Khasra No. 58 and by excavating the foundation and thereby filling it by the soil, had illegally encroached the said piece of land. With respect to the illegal encroachment, so made by the petitioner and other is persons, whose name have been referred above, the appropriate proceedings for eviction, is pending consideration before the Court of Tehsildar, Laksar. E. That it is submitted that the land for the grazing of cattle in the village, has been recorded in Khasra No. 78 and in the said Khasra No. 78, the illegal encroachment has been made by Hargyan and he has raised construction over the aforesaid Khasra number. With respect to the aforesaid encroachment, so made by the Hargyan, the appropriate proceedings for eviction, is pending consideration before the Court of Tehsildar, Laksar. 11. That the contents of paras 10 of the writ petition are absolutely misconceived and denied. It is submitted that in order to dispose of the waste water from the village. Nalis have constructed adjacent to Khasra No. 66 and construction has already been completed and the said Nalis are serving the purpose, for which they have been constructed. It is submitted that the Nalis, so constructed is not the waste of public money. It is absolutely misconceived to say that the water from the said Nalis will reach to the railway line inasmuch as, the said water is being led to the pits near the road by one part of Nali while the other part leads the waste water to pond. 12. It is absolutely misconceived to say that the water from the said Nalis will reach to the railway line inasmuch as, the said water is being led to the pits near the road by one part of Nali while the other part leads the waste water to pond. 12. That in reply to the contents of para 11 of the writ petition, it is submitted that after the report from the Lekhpal, had been received, the report of the Engineers, had also been called more than once, but neither the Lekhpal nor the team of Engineers could suggest a decision, which could redress the grievance of the villagers and considering the aforesaid situation, the concerned S.D.M., had himself visited the spot along with the concerned officers and engineers and after hearing all the villagers, a consensus have been arrived and it was finally decided that a Nali of width of 8 inch shall be constructed adjacent to both and further Nali will be constructed within the village that will lead the waste water to the pond in accordance to the natural slope. In accordance to the consensus so arrived and decision, so taken by the S.D.M., the Nalis have been constructed and they are working properly and are serving the purpose for which it was constructed.” 4. We have heard Mr. Lok Pal Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Rajendra Singh, learned counsel for respondent nos. 5 & 7 and Mr. M.S. Tyagi, learned counsel for respondent nos. 6, 8 & 9, besides the Deputy Advocate General for the State of Uttarakhand. 5. Having heard the parties, it is not in dispute that proceedings are afoot against respondent nos. 5 to 9. There can be no doubt that it is the bounden duty of the State Authorities to take all steps in accordance with the powers that are available to them to remove encroachment from public utility land, etc. This applies equally to the petitioner also. 6. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of recording the statements made in the counter affidavit, which we have referred to above and further directing that proceedings will be carried on against respondent nos. 5 to 9 and will be taken to its legal and logical culmination at the earliest. This applies equally to the petitioner also. 6. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of recording the statements made in the counter affidavit, which we have referred to above and further directing that proceedings will be carried on against respondent nos. 5 to 9 and will be taken to its legal and logical culmination at the earliest. Equally, we make it clear that the respondent authorities will be duty bound to proceed against the petitioner, who is alleged to be an encroacher, in accordance with law. Needless to say that if anybody else is found to have encroached on public utility land or other public land, the State will not hesitate to take/initiate action and to bring the action to its legal and logical end, without any delay.