HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6388/2025 1. Bhawani Shankar Sharma S/o Khanaiya Lal Sharma, Aged About 64 Years, Ward No. 05, Khachariya Was, Sikar, Rajasthan- 332710. 2. Ratan Singh Shekhawat S/o Arjun Singh Shekhawat, Aged About 74 Years, Ward No. 05, Khachariya Was, Sikar, Rajasthan- 332710. 3. Rambaboo Shyamsunder Dhoot S/o Shyamsundar Dhoot, Aged About 74 Years, 0101, Tower C Runwal Bliss, Crompton Greaves Compound, Kanjurmarg, East, Mumbai, P.o.- Bhandup East, Dist- Mumbai Suburban, Maharashtra- 400042. ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Public Works Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan). 2. Superintendent Engineer, Sikar Circle, Public Works Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Sikar (Raj.) 3. Assistant Engineer, Public Works Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Dantaramgarh, District Sikar (Raj.) 4. The Gram Panchayat, Khachariyawas, Panchayat Samiti Dantaramgarh, District Sikar, Through Its Secretary. 5. The Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Khachariyawas, Panchayat Samiti Dantaramgarh, District Sikar (Raj.) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anshuman Saxena For Respondent(s) : JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 12/05/2025 (2 of 3) [CW-6388/2025] 1. By way of filing this writ petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned notice dated 23.02.2023, by which the petitioners have been called upon to remove their encroachment from the land in question. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are having their right, title and interest over the property in question, but without examining their documents straightaway, the said notice has been issued. Counsel submits that after issuance of the aforesaid notice, a decision has been taken by the State to create a bypass from someother place, but in the garb of the impugned notice, the respondents are harassing the petitioner, hence, interference of this Court is warranted. 3. Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on the record. 4. This Court is not going to examine the merits and demerits of the case. If at all the petitioners have their right over the land in question, for which the public notice has been issued by the respondents, the petitioners would be at liberty to approach the authority concerned along with their documents and in case, they become successful in establishing their right over the property in question, appropriate orders would be passed by the authority and in case, the petitioners fail to do the same, the authorities would be at liberty to take appropriate steps in accordance with law. 5. For the aforesaid purpose, the petitioner may file comprehensive representation before the respondents within a period of one week from today. In case, such representation (3 of 3) [CW-6388/2025] is submitted, the same would be decided by the respondents within a period of three weeks thereafter, by passing reasoned and speaking order. 6. With the aforesaid observations, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. The stay application and all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. 7. For a period of four weeks, no coercive action be taken against the petitioners. 8. In case, any adverse order is passed against the petitioners, they would be at liberty to approach appropriate forum of law. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J KuD/120