Legal Services India - Law Articles is a Treasure House of Legal Knowledge and information, the law resources is an ever growing database of authentic legal information.

» Home
Thursday, October 31, 2024

It Appears Anybody Can Encroach On Any Part Of Land: Uttarakhand HC Directs Immediate Removal Of Encroachments Over River Beds Of Dehradun

Posted in: Civil Laws
Sun, Sep 4, 22, 17:21, 2 Years ago
star star star star star
0 out of 5 with 0 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 5673
Urmila Thapar Vs Uttarakhand We are dismayed to see the current state of affairs prevailing in the State with regard to the encroachment on forest land, water ways and public land.

It has to be taken most seriously that none other than the Uttarakhand High Court has in an extremely laudable, learned, landmark and latest judgment titled Urmila Thapar Vs State of Uttarakhand and others in WPPIL No. 58 of 2019 pronounced as recently as on August 31, 2022 has expressed severe dismay over the continuous brazen encroachments of river beds in Dehradun. It was pointed out by the Court that this happens with the tacit involvement and support of the authorities concerned.

In a stinging rebuke, a Division Bench of Uttarakhand High Court comprising of Hon’ble Chief Justice Shri Vipin Sanghi and Hon’ble Justice Shri Ramesh Chandra Khulbe while passing order for immediate removal of encroachments while taking potshots at the prevailing state of affairs minced just no words to lament that:
We are dismayed to see the current state of affairs prevailing in the State with regard to the encroachment on forest land, water ways and public land. It appears that it is a free for all, and anybody can encroach on any part of the land falling within the State – even on forest lands, and get away with it.

The Court took note of the communication of the District Magistrate, Dehradun dated 11.09.2019 addressed to the Municipal Commissioner of the Municipality and all the Sub-Divisional Magistrates concerned to take action for removal of encroachments from the river beds, which have remained unactioned for the last three years.

At the outset, this brief, brilliant, bold and balanced judgment authored by Hon’ble Chief Justice Shri Vipin Sanghi for a Division Bench of the Uttarakhand High Court comprising of himself and Hon’ble Justice Shri Ramesh Chandra Khulbe sets the ball rolling by first and foremost putting forth in para 1 that:
The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition in public interest raising the issue of unauthorized encroachments on water bodies and khalas/storm water drains in Rajpur Area of Doon Valley. The petitioner seeks directions to the State to declare the catchment areas of Khalas of Rispana and Bindal Rivers as ‘no construction zones’, and a further direction to the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate change, Union of India to pro-actively monitor and take necessary action on the changing environmental landscape of Doon Valley that is declared as an ‘Eco-Sensitive Zone’ by the Government of India in the year 1989.

To put things in perspective, the Division Bench then envisages in para 2 that, Mr. Abhijay Negi, learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention of the Court to the order dated 30.08.2019. By this order, this Court directed the District Magistrate, Dehradun to have an enquiry caused, and to submit a report to this Court furnishing details of the seasonal Nalas in existence in Doon Valley; the extent of encroachment over the said Nalas; and the steps being taken by the District Administration to remove such unauthorized constructions, and encroachments. On 18.09.2019, this Court was informed that the process of identifying encroachments is an elaborate exercise and it would take at least two months. This Court directed the respondents to ensure that no further encroachments take place in the seasonal streams in the Rajpur Area of the Doon Valley.

While elaborating, the Division Bench then enunciates in para 3 that:
A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent no.2 i.e., the District Magistrate, Dehradun on 13.09.2019. Alongwith this affidavit, he has placed on record the enquiry/survey conducted in terms of the order passed by this Court. Four different tabulations have been placed on record relating to Dehradun, Vikasnagar, Rishikesh and Doiwala Tehsils, all falling in district Dehradun. The tabulation contains particulars of the nature of the land, Khata number, Khasra number, total area, the area which has not been encroached upon and the area which has been encroached upon. In relation to Dehradun Tehsil, the Survey found that an area of 37.9305 hectares stands encroached on the river bed falling in different villages, as detailed in the tabulation. Similarly, for Vikasnagar Tehsil, as per the report, 57.4 hectares of river bed land has been encroached upon. In Rishikesh Tehsil, the encroachment is to the tune of 4.8866 hectares, and for Doiwala Tehsil, the encroachment is to the tune of 5.616 hectares.

Further, we ought to pay attention that the Division Bench then discloses in para 4 that:
The petitioner has filed rejoinder-affidavit to the counter-affidavit of respondent no.2. Alongwith the same, she has placed on record photographs to show the ongoing construction which, the petitioner claims, is on the river bed. At page no. 18 of the said rejoinder (running page no. 420 of the record), there is a photograph which shows that just behind the board put up by the Authorities, to state that M.D.D.A. has not allowed plotting and development of the land, construction activity is in progress. Mr. Abhijay Negi, further submits that now, the said board has also been removed after the photograph was taken by the petitioner.

Furthermore, the Division Bench then also hastens to add in para 5 that:
We may also take note to the communication of the District Magistrate, Dehradun dated 11.09.2019 addressed to the Municipal Commissioner of the Municipality and all the Sub-Divisional Magistrates concerned to take action for removal of encroachments from the river beds, which have, however, remained unactioned for the last nearly three years.

Most significantly and yet most distressingly, the Division Bench then minces no words to state the unpalatable truth in para 6 that:
We are dismayed to see the current state of affairs prevailing in the State with regard to the encroachment on forest land, water ways and public land. It appears that it is a free for all, and anybody can encroach on any part of the land falling within the State - even on forest lands, and get away with it. We are informed that the lands falling in river beds are all classified as forest lands, except those which fall within the municipal limits. Obviously, such activities cannot happen without the tacit approval of the authorities on the ground. It is high-time that the administration wakes up to the reality, and sets its house in order.

As a corollary, the Division Bench then mandates in para 7 noting that:
We, therefore, direct respondent nos. 1 to 4 to immediately start the process of removal of encroachments on river beds, which have already been identified and placed before the Court vide the counter affidavit dated 19.03.2019. It shall be the responsibility of Secretary (Revenue), Secretary (Urban Development) and Secretary (Forest) to ensure strict and speedy compliance of this order.

Quite forthrightly, the Division Bench then without mincing any words directs in para 8 that:
Insofar as the areas fall within the municipal limits, the Municipal Commissioner, Nagar Nigam, Dehradun shall be personally responsible to ensure that such encroachments are removed from the river beds. The Secretary (Revenue), Secretary (Urban Development), Secretary (Forest) and the Municipal Commissioner, Nagar Nigam, Dehradun shall hold meetings regularly to take steps to implement this order. The meeting shall be convened by the highest ranking officer amongst them, and he/ she shall preside over the meeting. Failure to comply with these directions shall compel this Court to take action against the aforesaid identified Officers.

What’s more, the Bench then also directed in para 9 stating that:
Weekly reports with regard to the actual removal of encroachments undertaken shall be filed before this Court. One report shall be filed on behalf of the Secretary (Revenue), Secretary (Urban Development) and Secretary (Forest), and the other report shall be filed by the Municipal Commissioner, Dehradun.

Most forthrightly, the Division Bench while adding more to it then minces no words whatsoever to direct unequivocally in para 10 stating that:
We make it clear that we would not be satisfied with mere paper exercise, and the reports should relate to actual action taken on the ground for removal of the encroachments. The photographs of the action taken should also be filed alongwith each of these reports.

It is worth noting that the Division Bench then directs in para 11 holding that, Copies of the status report shall be shared with the counsel for the petitioner. Before the next date, the petitioner shall file a tabulation of analysis of all such reports.

Finally, the Division Bench then concludes by directing in para 12 that:
List this case on 11.10.2022.

In conclusion, it may well be said that the Uttarakhand High Court has come down very heavily on the encroachments that are taking place so rampantly with impunity on forest land, water ways and public land. The High Court lamented that it is a free for all and anybody can encroach any part of the land and then get away with it easily without being held accountable in any manner. This definitely cannot be allowed to go on in any country where the law of the land prevails and so we see that the Uttarakhand High Court has minced no words in conveying its strongest disapproval over unabated, unhindered and unaccounted encroachments on river beds of Dehradun and so also encroachments in forest lands, water ways and public lands. Not just this, the Court has also made it quite amply clear that it will not be satisfied in any way with just paper work only and would see the actual action that would be taken by the authorities on the ground for the removal of all such encroachments which are illegal and are causing irreparable harm to the environment and this is definitely the crying need of the hour also! No denying it!

Sanjeev Sirohi, Advocate,
s/o Col (Retd) BPS Sirohi, A 82, Defence Enclave,
Sardhana Road, Kankerkhera, Meerut – 250001, Uttar Pradesh

Comments

There are no comments for this article.
Only authorized users can leave comments. Please sign in first, or register a free account.
Share
Sponsor
About Author
Sanjeev Sirohi Advocate
Member since Apr 20, 2018
Location: Meerut, UP
Following
User not following anyone yet.
You might also like
Present space law framework in the country. Space has heightened the curiosity of mankind for centuries. Due to the advancement in technology, there is fierce competition amongst nations for the next space war.
The scope of Section 151 CPC has been explained by the Supreme Court in the case K.K. Velusamy v. N. Palanisamy
Co-operative Societies are governed by the Central Co-operative Societies Act 1912, where there is no State Act. In West Bengal they were governed by the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act
Registration enables an NGO to be a transparent in its operations to the Government, Donors, to its members and to its urgent community.
The ingredients of Section 18 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 are
Drafting of legal Agreements and Deeds in India
ST Land rules in India,West Bengal
The paper will discuss about the provisions related to liquidated damages. How the law has evolved. Difference between the provisions of England and India.
A privilege may not be a right, but, under the constitution of the country, I do not gather that any broad distinction is drawn between the rights and the privileges that were enjoyed and that were taken away.
It is most hurting to see that in India, the soldiers who hail from Jammu and Kashmir and who join forces either in Army or in CRPF or in BSF or in police or in any other forces against the will of majority
Pukhraj v/s State of Uttarakhand warned high caste priests very strongly against refusing to perform religious ceremonies on behalf of lower caste pilgrims. It took a very stern view of the still existing practice of exclusion of the SC/ST community in Haridwar.
This article aims to define delay in civil suits. It finds the general as well as specific causes leading to pendency of civil suits and over-burdening of courts. This articles suggests some solutions which are pragmatic as well as effective to reduce the burden of the courts and speed up the civil judicial process.
This article deals with importance, needs, highlights and provisions of the Surrogacy Bill 2016, which is passed by the lok sabha on 19th December 2018 .
Cross Examination In Case of Injunction Suits, Injunctions are governed by Sections 37, 38, 39 to Section 42 of Specific Relief Act.
Satishchandra Ratanlal Shah v Gujarat inability of a person to return the loan amount cannot give rise to a criminal prosecution for cheating unless fraudulent or dishonest intention is shown right at the beginning of the transaction..
Dr.Ashok Khemka V/s Haryana upheld the integrity of eminent IAS officer because of his upright and impeccable credentials has emerged as an eyesore for politicians of all hues but also very rightly expunged Haryana Chief Minister ML Khattar adverse remarks in his Personal Appraisal Report
State of Rajasthan and others v. Mukesh Sharma has upheld the constitutional validity of Rule 8(2)(i) of the Rajasthan Prisons (Shortening of Sentences) Rules, 2006.
Gurmit Singh Bhatia Vs Kiran Kant Robinson the Supreme Court reiterated that, in a suit, the plaintiff is the dominus litis and cannot be forced to add parties against whom he does not want to fight unless there is a compulsion of the rule of law.
explicitly in a latest landmark ruling prohibited the use of loudspeakers in the territory without prior permission from the authorities.
The Commissioner of Police v/s Devender Anand held that filing of criminal complaint for settling a dispute of civil nature is abuse of process of law.
Rajasthan Vs Shiv Dayal High Court cannot dismiss a second appeal merely on the ground that there is a concurrent finding of two Courts (whether of dismissal or decreeing of the suit), and thus such finding becomes unassailable.
Complete Guide to Pleadings in India, get your Written statement and Plaint Drafted by highly qualified lawyers at reasonable rate.
Sushil Chandra Srivastava vs UP imposed absolute prohibition on use of DJs in the state and asked the state government to issue a toll-free number, dedicated to registering complaints against illegal use of loudspeakers. It will help control noise pollution to a very large extent if implemented in totality.
Rajasthan v/s Shri Ramesh Chandra Mundra that institutional independence, financial autonomy is integral to independence of judiciary. directing the Rajasthan Government to reconsider the two decade old proposal of the then Chief Justice of Rajasthan High Court to upgrade 16 posts of its Private Secretaries as Senior Private Secretaries
The Indian Contract act, 1872 necessities significant consideration in a few of its areas. One such area of the Indian Contract act of 1872 is where if any person finds a lost good belonging to others and takes them into his custody acts as the bailee to the owner of the good.
Government has notified 63 provisions of the Motor Vehicles Amendment Act 2019 including the ones dealing with enhanced penalties
Jose Paulo Coutinho vs. Maria Luiza Valentina Pereira no attempt has been made yet to frame a Uniform Civil Code applicable to all citizens of the country despite exhortations by it. Whether succession to the property of a Goan situated outside Goa in India will be governed by the Portuguese Civil Code, 1867
In a major legal setback to Pakistan, the High Court of England and Wales rejecting rightly Pakistan's frivolous claims and ruling explicitly that the VII Nizam of Hyderabad's descendants and India can collect 35 million pounds from Londons National Westminster Bank.
Power of Attorney and the Specific Relief Act, 1963
air pollution in Delhi and even adjoining regions like several districts of West UP are crossing all limits and this year even in districts adjoining Delhi like Meerut where air pollution was never felt so much as is now being felt.
Dr Syed Afzal (Dead) v/sRubina Syed Faizuddin that the Civil Courts while considering the application seeking interim mandatory injunction in long pending cases, should grant opportunity of hearing to the opposite side, interim mandatory injunctions can be granted after granting opportunity of hearing to the opposite side.
students of Banaras Hindu University's (BHU's) Sanskrit Vedvigyan Sankay (SVDVS) went on strike demanding the cancellation of the appointment of Assistant Professor Feroze Khan and transfer him to another faculty.
Odisha Development Corporation Ltd Vs. M/s Anupam Traders & Anr. the time tested maxim actus curiae neminem gravabit which in simple and straight language means that, No party should suffer due to the act of Court.
M/S Daffodills Pharmaceuticals Ltd v/s. State of U.P that no one can be inflicted with an adverse order, without being afforded a minimum opportunity of hearing. In other words, the Apex Court reiterated the supreme importance of the legal maxim and latin phrase titled Audi alteram partem
Ram Murti Yadav v/s State of Uttar Pradesh the standard or yardstick for judging the conduct of the judicial officer has necessarily to be strict, that the public has a right to demand virtually irreproachable conduct from anyone performing a judicial function.
Judicial Officers Being Made Scapegoats And Penalized By Inconvenient Transfers And Otherwise: SC
Desh Raj v/s Balkishan that the mandatory time-line for filing written statement is not applicable to non-commercial suits. In non-commercial suits, the time-line for written statement is directory and not mandatory, the courts have the discretion to condone delay in filing of written statement in non-commercial suits.
M/S Granules India Ltd. Vs UOI State, as a litigant, cannot behave as a private litigant, and it has solemn and constitutional duty to assist the court in dispensation of justice.
To exercise one's own fundamental right to protest peacefully does not give anyone the unfettered right to block road under any circumstances thereby causing maximum inconvenience to others.
Today, you have numerous traffic laws as well as cases of traffic violations. People know about safe driving yet they end up defying the safety guidelines. It could be anything like driving while talking on the phone, hit and run incidents, or driving under the influence of alcohol.
The legal processes are uncertain. Also, there are times when justice gets denied, and the legal outcomes get delayed. Hence, nobody wants to see themselves or their loved one end up in jail.
Arun Kumar Gupta v/s Jharkhand that judicial officer's integrity must be of a higher order and even a single aberration is not permitted. The law pertaining to the vital subject of compulsory retirement of judicial officers have thus been summed up in this noteworthy judgment.
Online Contracts or Digital Agreements are contracts created and signed over the internet. Also known as e-contracts or electronic contracts, these contracts are a more convenient and faster way of creating and signing contracts for individuals, institutions and corporate.
Re: Problems And Miseries Of Migrant Labourers has asked Maharashtra to be more vigilant and make concerted effort in identifying and sending stranded migrant workers to their native places.
Gerald Lynn Bostock v/s Clayton County, Georgia that employees cannot be fired from the jobs merely because of their transgender and homosexual identity.
This article compares two cases with similar facts, yet different outcomes and examines the reasons for the same. It revolves around consideration and validation of contracts.
Odisha Vikas Parishad vs Union Of India while modifying the absolute stay on conducting the Jagannath Rath Yatra at Puri has allowed it observing the strict restrictions and regulations of the Centre and the State Government.
Soni Beniwal v/s Uttarakhand even if there is a bar on certain matters to be taken as PIL, there is always discretion available with the Court to do so in exercise of its inherent powers.
Indian Contract Act was commenced in the year 1872 and since then, several deductions and additions have happened to the same. The following piece of work discusses about the concept of offer under the Indian Contract Act, 1872
Top