Sheshrao Kundlikrao Kharat v. The State of Maharashtra2.The Collector, Hingoli3.The Gram Sevak,Gram Panchayat OfficeSabalkheda

wp864.23-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD933 WRIT PETITION NO. 864 OF 2023Sheshrao Kundlikrao Kharat...Petitioner Versus 1.The State of Maharashtra2.The Collector, Hingoli3.The Gram Sevak, Gram Panchayat OfficeSabalkheda, 4.Sandip Laxman Bhise ...Respondents...Advocate for the Petitioner : Ms. Maya R. Jamdhade AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2: Mrs. V.N. Patil-Jadhav Advocate for Respondent No.3 : Mr. M.K. Jadhav Advocate for Respondent No.4 : Mr. D.P. Munde ….. CORAM:ALOK ARADHE, C.J. & ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.DATE:21st MARCH, 2025. P.C. : 1.Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. With consent ofthe parties, heard finally. 2.In this writ petition, the petitioner inter-alia seeks adirection to the Collector, Hingoli to issue direction to the GramSevak, Gram Panchayat, Sabalkheda to remove the wp864.23-2- encroachment, made by Respondent No.4, on the public road.3.The facts, giving rise to file this petition, in nutshell, arethat the grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent No.4has encroached on the part of the public road. The petitionertherefore, submitted a representation on 26.12.2018 to the GramPanchayat Office, Sabalkheda, Tq. Sengaon, district Hingoli toremove the encroachment made by respondent No.4 on thepublic road. The Gram Panchayat issued notice on 4.2.2019 tothe Respondent No.4 to remove the encroachment from thepublic road within a period of one week. Respondent No.4 on14.09.2020, produced Kabala certificate issued in the name ofthe father of respondent No.4. As such, the Gram Sevakforwarded a letter to the Tahsildar, seeking guidance, whetherthe encroachment in view of the certificate can be regularized. Since then, no action was taken by the respondent Nos. 1 to 3, toremove the encroachment made by respondent No.4 on publicroad, the petitioner therefore, has filed this writ petition.4.We have heard learned counsel for the parties at length.5.The issue whether respondent No.4 has madeencroachment on the part of public road or is in possession of theland, which has been allotted to him is a question, cannot be wp864.23-3- determined in a proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitutionof India. No one can claim the right to and encroach on a publicland. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case, wedeem it appropriate to issue the following directions:-I)The Gram Sevak, Gram Panchayat, Sabalkheda, Tq. anddistrict Hingoli, shall issue notices to the petitioner aswell as respondent No.4 and all other persons, who maybe in possession of the public road, for a survey to becarried out. The survey shall be carried out in presenceof the petitioner as well as respondent No.4.II)In case, after survey is conducted, it is found that therespondent No.4 or any other person is in possession ofthe public land, the respondents shall take action forremoval of the encroachment, in accordance with law.III)The Collector, Hingoli shall ensure that police assistanceis provided to the Gram Panchayat while removing theencroachment.IV.Needless to state, if any person is aggrieved by theorder, which may be passed by the Gram Sevak, GramPanchayat, Sabalkheda, shall be at liberty to take wp864.23-4- recourse to the appropriate remedy, as may beavailable to him/them in law.V.The aforesaid exercise shall be completed within aperiod of three months from today.VI.It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anyopinion on the merits of the case.VII.With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition isdisposed of.VIII.Rule is made absolute in the above terms. (ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.) (CHIEF JUSTICE) rlj/