Rajasthan HC Orders Newspaper Publication of Encroacher Lists in Ramgarh Dam Catchment Area

The Rajasthan High Court directed that lists of encroachers on government land in the Ramgarh dam catchment area be published in two Hindi dailies, with a warning that removal costs and criminal cases for trespass will follow if encroachments persist.

A Division Bench of the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur, sitting in a suo motu public interest proceeding concerning the protection of rivers, lakes, and water bodies, issued firm directions on 13 August 2026 for the removal of encroachments across the catchment area feeding the Ramgarh dam. Acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma and Justice Chandra Shekhar Sharma, acting on a compliance affidavit filed by the District Collector, found that encroachments were “huge in number” across five tehsils and that fresh cultivation of government and river-bed land was ongoing. Rather than wait for individual notices to reach each encroacher, the bench substituted general publication in two widely-circulated Hindi newspapers as the mode of notice, while making clear that costs of forcible removal and police action, including criminal cases for trespass, would follow non-compliance.

Encroachments Identified Across Five Tehsils in the Ramgarh Catchment

Pursuant to earlier directions issued on 30 July 2026, the Advocate General placed before the bench an affidavit of the District Collector listing encroachers in the catchment area of rivers and small drains that flow towards the Ramgarh dam. The affidavit covered five tehsils: Andhi, Jamwa Ramgarh, Amer, Shahpura, and Viratnagar.

The bench recorded that encroachers had freshly cultivated government land and river beds in several locations, and had filled up drains, thereby altering the natural course of drainage channels. The land in question was characterised as gair mumkin nalla, gair mumkin pahad, charagah, nadi, and similar categories — all falling directly in the catchment area or in the flow of rivers leading to the lake. The bench noted that persons in possession of such land were “ranked trespassers” with no authority in law to remain.

Notices under Section 91 of the Land Revenue Act, 1956 and under Section 72 of the Jaipur Development Authority Act, 1982 had already been served on some encroachers, and Tehsildars and Revenue Officers had begun removals. However, a large number of encroachers had not yet been served individual notices.

Why Individual Notice Was Replaced by Newspaper Publication

The bench took note of the legal requirement that encroachers must be notified and given at least 15 days to remove encroachments themselves before State authorities act. With the number of encroachers running into a large figure spread across multiple revenue villages and tehsils, the court reasoned that waiting for individual service under Section 91 of the Land Revenue Act, 1956 and Section 72 of the Jaipur Development Authority Act, 1982 would consume disproportionate time and allow the encroachments to continue.

The court directed that the consolidated list of encroachers, as annexed to the District Collector's affidavit, be published as a general notice in Rajasthan Patrika and Dainik Bhaskar. The bench selected these two publications specifically because they carry the widest circulation in Rajasthan and are published in Hindi. The court observed that such publication would foreclose any future claim by encroachers that they had not been informed of the proceedings against them or denied an opportunity of being heard.

The bench also accepted a suggestion by the Amicus Curiae, Dr. Abhinav Sharma, that local citizens be permitted to lodge complaints about encroachments directly with the Collector, Jaipur. The court directed that upon receipt of any such information, the Collector shall verify the complaint, and if found correct, initiate appropriate proceedings.

Consequences of Non-Compliance: Cost Recovery and Criminal Action

The bench made the consequences of non-compliance explicit. If encroachments are not removed within the notice period despite newspaper publication, the State and its functionaries are directed to proceed immediately with forcible removal. All expenditure incurred by the State in carrying out such removal is to be recovered from the encroachers concerned.

The court went further: where there is rampant encroachment or opposition to removal, State authorities are free to take police assistance, including the registration of criminal cases for trespass on government property. The bench stated that

The bench also observed that media and journalists, as “eyes and ears of the public,” have a role in flagging encroachments, and invited them to inform the Collector, Jaipur whenever such encroachments are found.

Connected Petitions

The order was passed in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11153/2011, the lead suo motu matter, along with three connected petitions: D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5102/2019 filed by Pyar Singh Meena, D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8224/2019 filed by Raj Kumar Meena, and D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16799/2024, a suo motu matter in the matter of “Save the Rivers, Lakes and Water Bodies” against the Union of India.

The Advocate General, Mr. Rajendra Prasad, appeared for the State respondents, assisted by Mr. Sheetanshu Sharma. Senior Advocate Mr. R.D. Rastogi appeared through video conference. Dr. Abhinav Sharma appeared as Amicus Curiae, also through video conference, with Mr. Vishal Choudhary and others.

Order

The Division Bench directed publication of the encroacher list in Rajasthan Patrika and Dainik Bhaskar, with a minimum 15-day window for voluntary removal. Non-compliance will attract forcible eviction at the encroacher's cost and, where there is resistance, registration of criminal cases for trespass. The Collector, Jaipur is directed to verify citizen complaints about additional encroachments and, where verified, initiate proceedings. The matters are listed for further hearing on 15 September 2026.