Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 26164 (RAJ)

AASTHA JAN KALYAN SEVA SAMITI v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CW/12944/2020 · 2025-05-07

Anoop Kumar Dhand

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12944/2020 Aastha Jan Kalyan Seva Samiti, Through Its President Jugal Kishore Son Of Khema Ram, R/o Ward No. 6, Near Talab, Neem Ka Thana, District Sikar. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. The District Collector, Sikar. 3. Sub Divisional Officer, Neem Ka Thana, District Sikar. 4. Tehsildar, Neem Ka Thana, District Sikar. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vidhut Gupta For Respondent(s) : Ms. Gunjan Chawla for Mr. Neeraj Batra, GC JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 07/05/2025 1. By way of filing this writ petition, a prayer has been made for issuing directions to the respondents for taking appropriate action against the encroachers, who have encroached upon the land of Mandir Mafi and remove the same. 2. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the site in question was inspected by the Patwari, Neek Ka Thana and it was found that the land bearing Khasra No.1033 at village Neem Ka Thana has been entered into the name of Mafi Mandir Shri Jankinath Ji and the land is lying vacant and (2 of 2) [CW-12944/2020] no construction activities are going on. In support of her contentions, inspection report dated 13.01.2021 has been placed on the record as Annexure-R/3. 3. Considering the above factual aspect of the matter, now no cause of action survives with the petitioner to continue with this writ petition, hence, the same is rendered as infructuous. 4. The instant writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. The stay application and all pending applications, if any, also stand dismissed. 5. However, in future any encroachment is found on the land of the temple, the petitioner would be at liberty to approach authorities concerned for redressal of his grievances. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J KuD/83