[2025:RJ-JP:26844] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10754/2025 1. Ghasi S/o Ladu, Resident Of Jodhpuria, Tehsil Niwai District Tonk 2. Girraj S/o Ladu, Resident Of Jodhpuria, Tehsil Niwai District Tonk 3. Hanuman S/o Balu, Resident Of Jodhpuria, Tehsil Niwai District Tonk 4. Devram S/o Ambalal, Resident Of Jodhpuria, Tehsil Niwai District Tonk 5. Bhanwar S/o Kalu, Resident Of Jodhpuria, Tehsil Niwai District Tonk 6. Lala S/o Lau, Resident Of Jodhpuria, Tehsil Niwai District Tonk 7. Suresh Chand S/o Harinarayan, Resident Of Jodhpuria, Tehsil Niwai District Tonk 8. Kishna S/o Deva, Resident Of Jodhpuria, Tehsil Niwai District Tonk 9. Devsingh S/o Bhagwan, Resident Of Jodhpuria, Tehsil Niwai District Tonk ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary Department Of Revenue, Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat Jaipur Rajasthan 2. The District Collector Tonk, District Tonk Rajasthan 3. Sub Divisional Officer, Niwai, District Tonk 4. Tehsildar Niwai, District Tonk 5. Devnarayan Mandit Trust Jodhpuria, Tehsil Niwai District Tonk Through Its Secretary ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Laxmi Kant Malpura For Respondent(s) : JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND [2025:RJ-JP:26844] (2 of 3) [CW-10754/2025] Order 17/07/2025 1. Learned counsel for the petitioners are residing on the land in question since last more than 30 years, a general notice has been issued by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Niwai, District Tonk to the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Niwai to constitute a Committee for removal of encroachment. Counsel submits that in the garb of the said notice, the respondents are bent upon to dispossess the petitioners from the subject land, without affording any opportunity of hearing. Counsel submits that such action, on the part of the respondents, is violation of the principles of natural justice. 2. Counsel submits that the petitioners have submitted a detailed representation to the District Collector for redressal of their grievances, but no heed has been paid and without deciding the same, the respondents are bent upon to dispossess the petitioners, hence, interference of this Court is warranted. 3. Without entering into the merits of the matter, whether the petitioners are encroachers or they are in rightful possession of the land in question or not, this disputed question of fact, cannot be adjudicated by this Court under its inherent jurisdiction contained under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, but looking to the fact that a representation submitted by the petitioner is still lying pending for its adjudication on its merits before the respondents, therefore, it is expected from the respondents to decide the same expeditiously, as early as possible, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of [2025:RJ-JP:26844] (3 of 3) [CW-10754/2025] certified copy of the order, by passing a reasoned and speaking order. 4. For a period of five weeks, no coercive action be taken against the petitioner. 5. It goes without saying that if any adverse order is passed against the petitioners, they would be at liberty to assail the same before the appropriate forum of law. 6. Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Aayush Sharma /262