Court No. - 38
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 39142 of 2018 Petitioner :- Richpal Singh And Another Respondent :- Rajpal And 16 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ranjit Saxena Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Abhinava Upadhya,J. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State- respondents.
By means of this writ petition the petitioners have come up to this Court raising a grievance that House No. 52 Sahaipur Phagota belonging to the petitioners is alleged to have been grabbed by Mafias with the help of the Police.
It is to be noted that earlier a dispute was going on between Shanti Devi and others and Somveer Singh and a second appeal was filed being Second Appeal No. 500 of 2010 which is alleged to have been dismissed in default on 5.12.2017. The petitioners claim to have purchased the property from Somveer Singh and now the allegation is that the aforesaid house has been forcibly taken possession of by the respondents.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has relied upon a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana Vs. Mukesh Kumar and others, reported in (2011) 10 SCC 404 wherein it has been held that the State cannot grab any private individual's property without following the procedure prescribed by law.
There is no dispute about the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court. However, the petitioners have not been able to indicate or show any material that the State in any manner was involved in grabbing the alleged house. In case, the petitioners have right and title over the property and some individual persons are interfering with the possession of the petitioners, it is always open for them to approach the appropriate Court for declaration of their right and title over the property in question. In this writ proceeding, such a direction cannot be issued.
The writ petition is mis-conceived and it is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 30.11.2018 SKM
(Vivek Varma,J.) (Abhinava Upadhya,J.)