[2026:RJ-JP:16170] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6859/2026 Harishankar S/o Sh. Pooran Ji, Aged About 57 Years, Resident Of Khai Road, Rain Basera, Kota, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principle Secretary, Department Of Local Bodies, Government Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 2. Commissioner Nagar Nigam, Kota North, Kota, Rajasthan. 3. Deputy Commissioner, Nagar Nigam, Kota North, Kota, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manoj Kumar Prajapat Mr. Mukesh Sharma For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUROOP SINGHI Order 17/04/2026 1. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the notice dated 16.07.2024 (Annexure-2) issued by respondent No. 3 – Deputy Commissioner, Nagar Nigam, Kota North, Kota, vide which the petitioner has been termed as an encroacher and has been directed to remove the alleged encroachments. 2. Mr. Manoj Kumar Prajapat, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in response to the notice dated 16.07.2024, the petitioner has already submitted a reply before the concerned authority on 29.07.2024, however, till date, no heed has been paid to the same. [2026:RJ-JP:16170] (2 of 2) [CW-6859/2026] 3. Learned counsel further submits that the impugned notice dated 16.07.2024 was merely a consequence to the complaint made by the petitioner on 10.06.2024 in respect of an encroachment made by one Mr. Sagar Panchal on a public road and while no action has been taken in respect of said complaint dated 10.06.2024, the impugned notice dated 16.07.2024 has been issued to the petitioner. 4. Taking note of the fact that the petitioner has already filed reply to the notice dated 16.07.2024 and also the fact that the complaint made by the petitioner dated 10.06.2024 is pending, respondent No. 3 – Deputy Commissioner, Nagar Nigam, Kota North, Kota is directed to consider the reply dated 29.07.2024 submitted by the petitioner and so also the complaint dated 10.06.2024 made by the petitioner and pass reasoned and speaking order(s) after considering all the obtained facts and after granting opportunity of hearing to all the affected parties in a time bound manner, strictly in accordance with law. 5. Needless to say, this order has been passed only to consider the petitioner’s reply and complaint and in no manner is to be construed as a direction to decide the same in a particular manner. 6. With the aforesaid directions the present writ petition stands disposed of. 7. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (ANUROOP SINGHI),J DIPESH CHAYAL /4