Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 39626 (RAJ)

CHANDRA HAAS SON OF RAGHUNATH v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CW/10546/2025 · 2025-07-16

Anoop Kumar Dhand

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:26469] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.10546/2025 1. Chandra Haas Son Of Raghunath, Aged About 63 Years, Resident Of Beejwadchouhan Post-Office Beejwad Chouhan Police Station Shahjahapur, Tehsil, Mundavar District Alwar 301401 2. Ramanand Son Of Chhitar Mal, Aged About 60 Years, Resident Of Beejwadchouhan Post-Office Beejwad Chouhan Police Station Shahjahanpur, Tehsil Mundavar District Alwar-301401 ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Panchayati Raj, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 2. District Collector, New Anaj Mand, District, Khairthal- Tizara Rajasthan. 3. Sub-Divisional Magistrate, New Anaj Mand, District- Khairthal-Tizara Rajasthan. 4. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, District-Khairthal- Tizara Rajasthan. 5. Block Development Officer, Tehsil-Mundawar District- Kairtal Tizara, Rajasthan. 6. Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Beejwad-Chouhan, Mundawar District Khairthal-Tizara Rajasthan. 7. Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board, Through Its Member Secretary Office Situtated At Plot No. 4, Jhalana Institutional Area, Jhalana Doongari, Jaipur-302004 ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : None present JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 16/07/2025 1. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioners with the following prayer:- “a) Issue an appropriate writ, order, or direction quashing and setting aside any action or decision of the Respondents regarding the conversion of pasture land bearing Khasra No. 457 into a sewage pond. b) Direct the Respondents to maintain the pasture land as Charagah and to refrain from any construction, [2025:RJ-JP:26469] (2 of 2) [CW-10546/2025] excavation, or alienation thereof without following due process of law including prior notice, public hearing, and statutory approvals. c) Direct the Respondents to ensure that no obstruction is caused to the Petitioners' access path and no health hazard is created by any sewage facility near the Petitioners' residences. d) Pass such other and further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the interest of justice.” 2. By way of filing this writ petition, a prayer has been made for issuing directions to the respondents to retain the subject land as pasture and not to sell the same for the purpose of sewage pond. 3. It appears that before approaching this Court, the petitioners had submitted a representation before the respondents on 30.06.2025 for redressal of their grievances. 4. In the considered opinion of this Court, the respondents are supposed to decide the said representation in accordance with law by passing a reasoned and speaking order. 5. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed of with the expectation from the respondents to decide the representation (pending, if any) expeditiously as early as possible. 6. Stay application as well as all applications (pending, if any) also stand disposed of. 7. Before parting with this order, it is made clear that this Court has not issued any order or direction to the respondents to decide the representation of the petitioners in a particular manner. They would be at liberty to decide the same strictly in accordance with law. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Karan/42