[2026:RJ-JP:9643-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 567/2024 1. Ashok Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Sanwar Mal Sharma, Aged About 45 Years, Resident Of Tapovan Colony, Shrimad- hopur District Sikar, Presently District Nimkathana. (Raj). 2. Rahul Sharma S/o Sohan Lal Sharma, Aged About 31 Years, Resident Of New Colony, Pushp Nagar, Shrimad- hopur District Sikar, Presently District Nimkathana. (Raj). 3. Lalit Prasad S/o Shri Babulal, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Jairampura, Tehsil Khandela District Sikar(Raj). 4. Rohit Kumar Saini S/o Ratan Lal Saini, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Dhani Badbor Wali, Shrimadhopur, District Sikar, Presently District Nimkathana(Raj). ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary To Government, Department Of Revenue, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj). 2. District Collector, Collectorate, Nimkathana (Raj). 3. Sub-Divisional Officer, Shrimadhopur, District Nimkathana (Raj). 4. Shri Rajendra Kasera S/o Shri Maliram Kasera, R/o Rajen- dra Machinary Store, Pnb Bank Ke Samne, Shrimadhopur, District Nimkathana (Raj). 5. Birbal Choudhary S/o Shri Kurdaram Chouhary, R/o Jayka House, Gowshala Market, Shrimadhopur, District Nimkathana(Raj). 6. Shri Buddhiprakash Mahala S/o Shri Shyamlal Mahala, R/o Shyam Telecome, Gowshala Bazar, Shrimadhopur, District Nimkathana. 7. Shri Mahaveer Prasad Agarwal S/o Shri Madanlal Agarwal, R/o Laxmi Provision Store, Gowshala Bazar, Shrimad- hopur, District Nimkathana (Raj). 8. Bhanwar Lal S/o Shri Gazanand Soni, R/o Haridwari Lal Gazanand Soni, Chaupad Bazar, Shrimadhopur, District Nimkathana (Raj). 9. Shri Onkar Singh S/o Shri Narain Singh, R/o Pushp Nagar, [2026:RJ-JP:9643-DB] (2 of 4) [CW-567/2024] Shrimadhopur, District Nimkathana (Raj). 10. Shri Mahesh Kumar S/o Rambharosa Thatera, R/o Gopinath Auto, Gowshala Bazar Shrimadhopur, District Nimkathana(Raj). 11. Shri Jhabar Singh S/o Shri Mannaram Jat, R/o Kamal Fancy Garments, Shrimadhopur, District Nimkathana (Raj). ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Suresh Pareek, Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. Nachiketa Pareek, Mr. Abhay Purohit, Mr. Prem Chand Sharma, Mr. Pulkit Pareek & Mr. Mukesh Kr. Gurjar For Respondent(s) : Mr. GS Gill, AAG assisted by Ms. Shikha Sharma Mr. Surendra Kumar Mr. Surya Pratap Singh Mr. Dhruv Atri HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHUBHA MEHTA Order 06/03/2026 1. A reply has been filed by the concerned respondent Nos.7, 10 & 11 submitting that they are tenants of a shop which has been rented out by the Shri Krishna Gaushala Samiti, at the main market area of khandela road and Shri Krishna Gaushala Samiti has not been impleaded as party to this PIL. Counsel for respondents submits that for almost 50 years, the respondents have been tenants having a shop in the area. He submits that this PIL is not bona fide and an unnecessary dispute is being created for extraneous purposes. The photographs have also been at- tached which reflect that a proper market with godowns and of- [2026:RJ-JP:9643-DB] (3 of 4) [CW-567/2024] fices of the Municipality are existing with a proper road in between the shops. 2. In these circumstances, we are unable to accept that there is encroachment on ‘charagah’ land. The receipts also reflect that the shops were let out long back. 3. From the perusal of Jamabandi (khatoni) documents placed on record by the petitioner and the respondent No.5, it seems that while in khasra Nos.1127, 1128, 1131, 1132, 1132/2699, 1133. 1135, 1136, 1139/2, 1154, 1571, 1572, 1573 1613, 1927, 1928/2, 1928/3, 1929, 1930, 1935, 1937, 1970, 2317, 2319, 2320, 2323 & 2330, the land belongs to Municipality, Shrimadhopur and is gair mumkin abadi as well as agricultural, the Jamabandi placed on record as Annexure-1 to the petition mentions that the land from khasra Nos.2331, 2332, 2334, 2335, 2340 to 2345, 2719/2346, 2733/1928, 2734/1928, 2735/1933, 2736/1933, 2960/1936, 2970/2732, 352 to 356, 362, 366, 392, 393, 416, 417, 421, 549/2678 & 906, to be charagah land. 4. Taking into consideration that the khasra numbers seem to be adjacent to one another, we find from the map placed before us that while in one part of the land there is abadi land, the other side may be a pasture land. 5. The Shri Krishna Gaushala Samiti is having a huge chunk of land which appears to be on the pasture land. Since the pasture land is being used for accommodating the cattle, the same cannot be said to be a misuse of pasture land as it is being used for the cattle purposes. [2026:RJ-JP:9643-DB] (4 of 4) [CW-567/2024] 6. We, therefore, do not find any reason to interfere in the functioning of the Municipality as well as that of the State Government. 7. The further prayer of the petitioner to get the land measured, cannot be granted in the PIL. The remedy lies elsewhere for seeking measurement of the land. 8. We also notice that the Gaushala is not being impleaded as a party and on that count, we cannot pass any order as against Gaushala. 9. This Public Interest Litigation is misconceived and is, accord- ingly, dismissed. (SHUBHA MEHTA),J (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),ACTING CJ RAHUL MIRKHANI/38