HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7716/2025 1. Smt. Puran Dei, Aged About 72 Years, W/o Shri Karan Singh, 2. Smt. Geeta Devi, Aged About 45 Years, W/o Shri Mohan Singh, 3. Smt. Pooja Kumari, Aged About 30 Years, W/o Shri Lokesh Kumar 4. Smt. Premwati, Aged About 60 Years, W/o Shri Babulal 5. Smt. Manju, Aged About 40 Years, W/o Shri Soopram 6. Smt. Kusuma, Aged About 30 Years, W/o Shri Satish Kumar 7. Laxman Singh, Aged About 40 Years, S/o Shri Bhogiram 8. Smt. Omwati, Aged About 50 Years, W/o Shri Bhoop Singh 9. Smt. Pooran Devi, Aged About 40 Years, W/o Shri Mohan Singh 10. Smt. Beena Kumari, Aged About 30 Years, W/o Shri Naresh Kumar 11. Smt. Guddi Devi, Aged About 45 Years, W/o Shri Ram Roop, 12. Smt. Vijay Kumari, Aged About 35 Years, W/o Shri Harbhan Singh 13. Smt. Geeta Devi, Aged About 45 Years, W/o Shri Prem Singh 14. Smt. Munni Devi, Aged About 46 Years, W/o Shri Deep Chand 15. Smt. Rajan Dei, Aged About 33 Years, W/o Shri Deep Chand 16. Smt. Maharaji, Aged About 33 Years, W/o Shri Uttam Singh 17. Smt. Dropati, Aged About 55 Years, W/o Shri Amar Singh 18. Smt. Parvati, Aged About 60 Years, W/o Shri Soran Singh (2 of 4) [CW-7716/2025] 19. Smt. Rampati, Aged About 53 Years, W/o Shri Shyam Singh 20. Banay Singh, Aged About 55 Years, S/o Shri Suraj Mal 21. Smt. Rekha Devi, Aged About 35 Years, W/o Shri Pappa Singh 22. Prem Singh, Aged About 45 Years, S/o Shri Ramdayal 23. Saroj Devi, Aged About 45 Years, W/o Vijay Singh 24. Birma, Aged About 44 Years, W/o Shri Roopsingh 25. Ramroop, Aged About 51 Years, S/o Shri Mangi 26. Smt. Neki, Aged About 49 Years, W/o Shri Vijay Singh 27. Mohan Singh, Aged About 48 Years, S/o Shri Rewati Lal 28. Khushi Ram, Aged About 45 Years, S/o Shri Ram Kishan 29. Bhudev, Aged About 45 Years, S/o Late Shri Jagram 30. Smt. Indra Devi W/o Hariram, Aged About 50 Years, All R/o Vijay Nagar Colony, Heera Das, Bharatpur (Rajasthan). ----Petitioners Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Urban Development, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. The Bharatpur Development Authority, Through It's Commissioner, Bharatpur (Raj.). ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dinesh Chand Gupta For Respondent(s) : JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 20/05/2025 (3 of 4) [CW-7716/2025] 1. By way of filing this writ petition, a general notice dated 27.02.2025 issued by Bharatpur Development Authority, Bharatpur has been challenged. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by issuing the aforesaid general notice, the respondents are bent upon to take action against the petitioner by treating them as encroachers upon the land bearing khasra No.299, 230, 231, 255/544, 223, 224, 225, 226, 227, 228, 279, 268, 269 and 270, etc. 3. Counsel submits that the petitioners purchased certain part of property by way of registered sale deed and they are in rightful possession of the same, but without conducting a proper survey and without examining the title of the petitioners, a general notice has been issued. Counsel submits that a notice for demand of justice has been served upon the respondents by the petitioners for redressal of their grievances, but no heed has been paid, hence, under these circumstances, the petitioners have approached this Court by way of filing this petition. 4. Without going into the controversy involved in the matter with regard to the question that whether the petitioners are in rightful possession or not, it is a question of fact, which can be adjudged by the respondents-authorities after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and considering their documents upon which they are placing reliance. (4 of 4) [CW-7716/2025] 5. Since the petitioners have already approached the respondents by way of notice for demand of justice and the same has not been decided as yet and considering the above factual aspect of the matter, this Court deems it just and proper to dispose of the instant writ petition by issuing directions to the respondents to decide the notice for demand of justice/representation of the petitioners, strictly in accordance with law, by passing a reasoned and speaking order after affording them due opportunity of hearing within a period of four weeks. 6. For a period of four weeks, no coercive action be taken against the petitioners. 7. The stay applications and all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J KuD/78