Summary Proceeding for Eviction Requires Considering Representation and Adherence to Due Process of Law

The petitioner, a resident of Village Dhiri, Rajnandgaon, has resided in a house on land bearing Khasra No. 1/1 since 2016.

Between May 2025 and March 2026, the newly elected Sarpanch of Respondent No. 1 (Gram Panchayat Dhiri) issued several notices alleging illegal construction and encroachment, claiming the land was required for a mini-stadium/playground.

The petitioner contended that the notices were selective—targeting only a few of the 60 houses on that land—and that she holds a BPL card and pays regular taxes.

Asserting a violation of her property rights and procedural unfairness, she filed this writ petition to quash the notices and seek protection from demolition.

1. Whether the Gram Panchayat can summarily dispossess a resident without following the due process of law provided under statutory provisions.

2. Whether the petitioner should be relegated to an alternative remedy or permitted to file a detailed representation before the concerned local authority.

Principles of natural justice and the constitutional mandate under Article 300A of the Constitution of India, which provides that no person shall be deprived of their property save by authority of law.

Doctrine of "efficacious alternative remedy," suggesting that writ jurisdiction should generally not be exercised when statutory procedures for dispute resolution are available, provided due process is followed by the administrative body.

The petitioner argued that the impugned notices were arbitrary and issued without authority or a sanctioned plan for the proposed stadium.

Reference was made to the petitioner’s long-standing possession and payment of taxes as evidence that she could not be treated as a summary encroacher.

The court, while noting the State's argument that an alternative remedy exists, focused on the fact that the current stage of the dispute involved "only a notice for removal of encroachment".

The Court determined that the appropriate course of action was to ensure the petitioner was granted a fair hearing at the local level. By directing the petitioner to file a reply and the Gram Panchayat to pass a "reasoned order," the Court enforced the requirement for administrative transparency and procedural fairness.

The Court directed the petitioner to appear before the Gram Panchayat, Dhiri, and submit an appropriate reply to the notices. The Gram Panchayat was ordered to consider and decide the reply in accordance with the law, after affording the petitioner a due opportunity of hearing, and to pass a reasoned order addressing her grievances.