NAVEEN KUMAR AGRAWAL Vs. D B GUPTA
LAWS(RAJ)-2015-3-173
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Decided on March 23,2015

Naveen Kumar Agrawal Appellant
VERSUS
D B Gupta Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) THIS contempt petition has been filed for non -compliance and disobedience of the judgment dated 18.11.2013, passed by a Division Bench of this Court in the light of the judgment dated 29.10.2012 in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.16341/2012, by which a direction was issued to remove the unauthorized constructions/ structures on the 40 feet wide road. The Division Bench found that a 40 feet wide road was left in the area in question, and that even after regularization in the year 1999, and amendment in the plan in 2000, the length of the road at 40 feet was not disturbed. A large number of encroachments were found to be raised on this road, which were directed to be removed. The time was granted upto 20.11.2012, as 'Diwali' festival was approaching at that time, to remove the encroachments. The operative portion of the judgment provided that; As prayed, we stay demolition till 20th November, 2012 and if the encroachments and illegal constructions/structures are not removed by the petitioners by 20th November, 2012, the respondents shall be free to take steps for demolition of encroachments and illegal constructions/structures made by the petitioner on the road in question.
(2.) IT is submitted that the applicants were also the petitioners in the writ petition. They have removed their constructions, and are now aggrieved by the respondents for not removing the constructions, and no action taken against them by the Jaipur Development Authority, despite reminders given to it.
(3.) IT is submitted that non -compliance of the judgment is causing inconvenience to the applicants as there are large number of encroachments on the road, which are affecting the movement of the general public and the traffic. We do not propose to issue notice in the contempt petition, at the instance of the applicants, as they had also violated the law. The averments made by them that they had removed the offending constructions raised by them on the 40 feet wide road, would require a scrutiny, to be made of the status of the width of the road. The applicants, after allegedly removing the constructions, cannot be given the status of an informant in a contempt petition, to take action against the remaining violators of law.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.