IGNP Canal Encroachments: Remove in 4 Months, Says Raj HC

Remove Encroachments Along Indira Gandhi Canal in Jaisalmer Within Four Months, After Hearing Occupants: Rajasthan High Court

Published: 29 October 2026 · NyayVidhan

A Division Bench of the Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur disposed of a society's writ petition against encroachments on either side of the Indira Gandhi canal, after the State's Additional Advocates General assured it that the colonisation department would inquire and act, with the Forest Department's help (paras 2, 5-6, 8). The respondent departments must identify the encroachments and, after giving the occupants an appropriate hearing, remove them under the law within four months of receiving a certified copy; a compliance report is due after four months (paras 8-9).

Key holdings

The respondent departments must identify encroachments on either side of the canal and complete their removal within four months of receiving a certified copy (para 8).

Removal must follow the recourse available under the law and an appropriate opportunity of hearing to the occupants (para 8).

The direction rests on the State's assurances of inquiry and action by the colonisation department, with the Forest Department's help (paras 5-6, 8).

Both Additional Advocates General must file a compliance report before the Registry after four months (para 9).

Judgment digest by NyayVidhan: a summary of the court's judgment, not its text. The judgment itself is the authoritative version.

Brief Facts

A society based in Jaisalmer district filed a writ petition against the State, the Colonisation Commissioner of the Indira Gandhi Nahar Pariyojana (IGNP), and IGNP colonisation and forest officers at Mohangarh and Nachna. It sought removal of encroachments from the compulsory/optional strip along the canal, cancellation of illegal allotments there, notification of the strip as in Sri Ganganagar and Bikaner, removal of encroachments and allotments from the 128th Battalion (Ecological Task Force) plantation area at Mohangarh, and possession of notified forest area with action against tree felling (para 2). It said rampant encroachments on either side of the canal were dehors the law (para 3). Occupants had applied to be impleaded, but nobody appeared to press it (para 4).

Court's Findings

The Court recorded the assurance of Additional Advocate General Rajesh Panwar that the competent authorities of the colonisation department would examine the matter and, after inquiry and investigation, take immediate steps to remove anyone found occupying the department's land on either side of the canal dehors the law (para 5). Additional Advocate General Mahaveer Bishnoi stated that the State would extend whatever help was required from the Forest Department (para 6). On those statements, the society asked that the respondents be given a fixed time to act (para 7). The Court noted that precious land on either side of the canal was in the occupation of trespassers and that the respondent departments had to deal with it urgently (para 8). Relying on both assurances, it directed them to identify the encroachments and, where the land is found occupied by encroachers, to take the recourse available under the law for removal immediately after an appropriate opportunity of hearing (para 8). The order decides no individual occupant's claim and does not deal separately with the prayers on allotments, notification of the strip, the plantation area or tree felling (paras 2, 8).

Legal Principle

Encroachments on canal-side government land are to be removed through the recourse available under the law, after the authorities identify them and give the occupants an appropriate opportunity of hearing. On the State's assurances, the High Court fixed four months for the exercise and called for a compliance report (paras 5-6, 8-9).

NyayVidhan's view · Practice note

Why It Matters

For people holding land along the Indira Gandhi canal in Jaisalmer district, this order sets a timetable, not a verdict. The Division Bench made no finding against any particular occupant: on the State's assurances it directed the respondent departments to identify encroachments on either side of the canal and remove them under the law only after an appropriate hearing, within four months of receiving a certified copy (paras 5-6, 8). Occupants who claim a lawful title or allotment should be ready to show it at that hearing; their impleadment application was not pressed before the Court (para 4). Both Additional Advocates General must file a compliance report after four months (para 9).

Editorial comment by the NyayVidhan Editorial Desk. It is not part of the Court's judgment and is not legal advice.