Case Note & Summary
The Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur heard three connected writ petitions with common questions of law and fact. Lead petition S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3445/2026 was filed by Smt. Kiran, connected with S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3443/2026 by Santosh Singh and S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.16463/2026 by Mohammed Aslam. The petitioners sought writs directing Municipal Corporation, Jodhpur and State authorities to hand over vacant possession of commercial plots in Kabir Nagar Commercial Scheme and complete consequential formalities. Two applications for impleadment were filed by Jagmal Singh and Umrao Khan, who claimed lawful possession over nearby plots. During auction proceedings conducted by respondents for commercial plots at Kabir Nagar, Plot No.8 was allotted to Kiran, Plot No.10 to Santosh Singh, and Plot No.7 to one Usha Sharda, who later sold it to Mohammed Aslam. Kiran and Santosh Singh allegedly deposited entire consideration in 2011 and were issued patta, but possession was not given for over 15 years. Mohammed Aslam claimed possession of Plot No.7 through transfer from Usha Sharda and had obtained permission for construction. Respondents alleged encroachments: a Joint Committee report dated 10.07.2026 found Umrao Khan encroaching on Plot Nos.7 and 8, Jagmal Singh on Plot No.9, and Mohammed Aslam on Plot No.10. Notices under Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 2009 were issued on 15.07.2026. Applicants Jagmal Singh and Umrao Khan contended they were rehabilitated from earlier kachhi basti lands and were lawful allottees, not encroachers; Umrao Khan had also filed a civil suit and obtained temporary injunction. Petitioners argued possession was not given despite full payment and patta, and alternatively prayed for allotment of alternative plots as per Urban Improvement Trust v. Lakshmi Chand Bhaodari (AIR 1992 Raj 153). Respondents opposed, stating that public notice was issued, survey found encroachments, and notices were issued under Section 194(12). Prior writ petition by Umrao Khan (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.16678/2026) was disposed of on 03.08.2026, directing him to avail statutory appeal and restraining coercive action, which respondents cited as reason for inability to act. The court noted undisputed purchase/allotment facts and observed that lands were in possession of third parties claiming rights, while Municipal Corporation treated them as encroachers based on Joint Committee report. It also noted respondents' inability to handover possession due to encroachment and that notices had been issued. The provided text ends at paragraph 21 without recording the final operative order, so the final decision and ratio decidendi are not available in the excerpt.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Right to Property - Articles 14 and 300-A of Constitution of India - Writ remedies for non-delivery of possession of auctioned commercial plots - Petitioners paid full consideration and received patta/lease but possession was not handed over for over 15 years due to alleged encroachment - Court noted the dispute and factual claims but no final direction in the supplied excerpt (Paras 6-20). B) Municipal Law - Encroachment and Eviction - Section 194(12) of Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 2009 - Notices issued on 15.07.2026 based on Joint Committee report dated 10.07.2026 identifying Umrao Khan on Plot Nos.7-8, Jagmal Singh on Plot No.9, and Mohammed Aslam on Plot No.10 as encroachers - Applicability of statutory appeal considered in prior writ petition S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.16678/2026 where applicant Umrao Khan was relegated to appeal with interim protection against coercive action - Court took note of respondents' inability to act due to that order (Paras 12-14, 19-20). C) Civil Procedure - Impleadment of Parties - Order I Rule 10 CPC (not explicitly cited) - Applications by Jagmal Singh and Umrao Khan for impleadment claiming lawful allotment under rehabilitation scheme; respondents disputed and called them encroachers - Court considered rival claims in writ proceedings but no final order in excerpt (Paras 8-10, 14). D) Writ Jurisdiction - Alternative Relief - AIR 1992 Raj 153 - Petitioners alternatively sought allotment of alternative plots of same measurement in same scheme if possession could not be given - Court noted this alternative argument but no final decision in excerpt (Paras 11, 17-18).
Issue of Consideration
Whether writ petitioners are entitled to vacant and peaceful possession of Plot Nos.7, 8 and 10 Kabir Nagar Commercial Scheme despite alleged encroachments; whether alternative plots of same measurement should be allotted if possession cannot be given; whether applicants Jagmal Singh and Umrao Khan are encroachers or lawful allottees; and whether the availability of statutory appeal under Section 194(12) of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 2009 affects the writ remedy.
Final Decision
The provided judgment text ends at paragraph 21 without recording the final operative order; therefore, the final decision is not available in the excerpt.
Law Points
- Writ petition for possession of auctioned property
- alternative allotment of plot under Urban Improvement Trust v. Lakshmi Chand Bhaodari (AIR 1992 Raj 153)
- encroachment removal under Section 194(12) Rajasthan Municipalities Act
- 2009
- right to property under Articles 14 and 300-A Constitution of India
- impleadment of parties claiming lawful possession
- statutory alternative remedy of appeal.
