[2025:RJ-JP:25409] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10250/2025 Rameshwar Lal S/o Hukmaram, Aged About 67 Years, R/o Village Shahpura, Tehsil Khandela (Present Tehsil Reengus), District Sikar (Rajasthan). ----Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Additional Chief Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. The District Collector, Sikar. 3. The Sub-Division Officer, Khandela (Present Reengus), District Sikar. 4. The Tehsildar, Tehsil Khandela (Present Tehsil Reengus), District Sikar. 5. The Executive Engineer, Pwd Reengus, District Sikar. 6. The Assistant Engineer, Pwd Division Reengus, District Sikar. 7. The Village Development Officer, Gram Panchayat Thikariya, Panchayat Samiti Thikariya, District Sikar. 8. Administrator, Gram Panchayat Thikariya, Panchayat Samiti Khandela, District Sikar (Rajasthan). ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sultan Singh Kuri For Respondent(s) : JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 10/07/2025 1. Aggrieved by the impugned notices dated 24.06.2025 and 01.07.2025 issued by the Gram Panchayat Thikariya, Panchayat Samiti Khandela, District Sikar, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing this writ petition. [2025:RJ-JP:25409] (2 of 3) [CW-10250/2025] 2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that by issuing the above notices, the Panchayat is bent upon to eject the petitioner from the subject land by treating him as encroachcer over the same. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is having valid title over the subject land, as the Panchayat itself has issued patta to him. Counsel submits that under these circumstances, the petitioner is not encroacher but without any inquiry in this regard, straightaway the list of certain encroacher has been prepared wherein the name of the petitioner has been mentioned. Counsel submits that without holding any inquiry, no coercive action should have been taken against the petitioner, hence interference of this Court is warranted. 3. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on record. 4. This Court is not going into controversy whether the petitioner is having any valid title over the subject land or not and whether he has encroahced upon the subject land or not but looking to the fact that the petitioner is having valid patta over the subject land, hence the matter is required to be considered by the Panchayat before taking any action against him 5. In view of the above, the present writ petition stands disposed of, granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the Panchayat by way of filing appropriate representation along with patta within a period of one week from today. In case, such representation is filed by him within the above stipulated time, it is expected from the Panchayat to decide the same strictly in accordance with law, after providing him appropriate opportunity [2025:RJ-JP:25409] (3 of 3) [CW-10250/2025] of hearing, expeditiously as early as possible within a period of three weeks thereafter. 6. In case, the petitioner still feels aggrieved by the action or by any adverse order, he would be at liberty to approach the appropriate forum of law. 7. For a period of four weeks, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Ashu/8