Construction on private land stayed pending adjudication of encroachment objections by revenue authorities.

The petitioners, residents of Village Akalon, claim peaceful possession of agricultural land bearing Survey No. 256/2, which was previously protected by a permanent injunction and a civil decree dated 24.07.2024 in Civil Suit No. RCS-A/35/2021.

On 20.02.2026, Respondent No. 4 (Tehsildar, Isagarh) issued a notice for construction of a Janpad Panchayat building on the adjacent government land (Survey No. 256/1).

The petitioners allege that despite their objections, construction and material dumping have encroached upon their private land (Survey No. 256/2), violating the subsisting civil decree.

The State countered that construction is confined to government land following proper demarcation.

The petitioners sought a writ under Article 226 to stop construction and mandate a fresh demarcation.

1. Whether the respondent authorities are encroaching upon the petitioners' private land (Survey No. 256/2) in violation of a standing civil court decree.

2. Whether the Court should intervene under Article 226 to direct the revenue authorities to adjudicate pending objections regarding land demarcation and encroachment.

The Court exercised its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

It applied the principle of administrative accountability, requiring revenue authorities to decide pending statutory or factual objections regarding land disputes through reasoned and speaking orders.

The Court also recognized the necessity of interim protection to preserve the status quo of property rights pending an administrative determination.

The Court observed that the core of the dispute—whether construction was occurring on Survey No. 256/1 (Government) or Survey No. 256/2 (Private)—remained unresolved as the petitioners’ formal objections were still pending before the Tehsildar.

Rather than adjudicating the factual merits of the encroachment or the validity of the satellite imagery provided, the Court determined that the interest of justice would be best served by requiring the competent revenue authority to perform its duty.

By directing a time-bound disposal of the objections, the Court ensured that the petitioners’ rights under the 2024 civil decree are not rendered illusory by administrative inaction while avoiding a premature determination on the merits of the demarcation.

It directed Respondent No. 4 (Tehsildar, Isagarh) to decide the petitioners' objections regarding the alleged encroachment on Survey No. 256/2 by passing a reasoned and speaking order within four weeks of receiving the court order.

Critically, the Court ordered that no construction activity shall be carried out on Survey No. 256/2 until the objections are formally decided.