'Right To Life Includes Safe Highways': Rajasthan High Court Orders Removal Of All Encroachments Including Religious Ones Within 2 Months
While taking judicial notice of large-scale encroachments, including religious structures, within the Right of Way (ROW) of National Highway across Rajasthan, the High Court has directed their removal or suitable relocation within a period of 2 months.The division bench of Dr. Justice Pushpendra Singh Bhati and Justice Sandeep Shah observed that the lack of inter-department coordination...
While taking judicial notice of large-scale encroachments, including religious structures, within the Right of Way (ROW) of National Highway across Rajasthan, the High Court has directed their removal or suitable relocation within a period of 2 months.
The division bench of Dr. Justice Pushpendra Singh Bhati and Justice Sandeep Shah observed that the lack of inter-department coordination while granting of permission, licenses and utility connections in isolation, without reference to Highway Control lines, building lines, road land boundaries etc, have resulted in creation of hazardous access points.
“…State-wide pattern of illegal occupation of Highway land within the ROW, posing a direct threat to human life and offending the guarantee under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.”
The Court opined that permissions granted could not operate as a defence if a structure fell within the prohibited highway zone, and laid down directions for the concerned authorities to handle the situations, that included:
- Demarcation of ROW/Road land boundary/building line/control line etc. and maintenance of a district wise encroachments register. Identification of accident prone areas for immediate action.
- Constitution of a District Highway Safety Task Force for coordinated demarcation and removal action.
- No renewal of any license, NOC, permission etc, by any department for any site falling within Highway Safety zones without prior clearance from NHAI/PWD.
- Existing licenses, LOCs, permissions etc, to be reviewed within 15 days, and kept in abeyance upon detection of violation.
- After removal, caution boards to be installed to prevent future occupation.
- Police authorities to provide protection during removal and prevent re-encroachments.
- State to indicate a definite timelines for framing of rules under Section 138 (1A) and 210-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
- Periodic Highway safety audits to be institutionalized.
The Court was hearing a civil writ petition involving an accident that claimed four lives owing to Dharmkanta constructed within the prohibited highway zone. During this hearing, it was highlighted that within the ROW of National Highways across Rajasthan there were 103 religious, 881 residential and 1232 commercial encroachments. It was held,
“…any occupation within the Right of Way or road land boundary is impermissible and liable to removal; no construction is permissible within the building line; and only regulated construction with due statutory permission is permissible within the control line… the protection of life under Article 21 of the Constitution encompasses the State's positive obligation to ensure safe movement on public roads and highways.”
It was opined that proliferation of occupations within the Highway safety zones were not merely result of individual encroachments but also systemic administrative fragmentation and absence of inter-departmental coordination wherein permissions were granted without reference to Highway control norms.
The Court held that such permission could not operate as estoppel against the statue or public safety.
It was further clarified that even religious structures could not claim immunity from removal if those fell within the ROW of a highway. Reference was made to the Supreme Court case of Union of India v State of Gujarat which held that,
“…encroachments in the nature of temples, mosques, churches, gurudwaras or other religious constructions situated on public roads, streets, pavements or other public utility spaces cannot be permitted to remain, and that the State authorities are under a positive obligation to remove such encroachments…”
In this background, while laying down the directions as mentioned above, the Court held that all such encroachments shall be treated as illegal and be removed/relocated within 2 months.
The State has been directed to file a district wise status report within 2 months. The matter has been listed for March 10, 2026.
Title: Himmat Singh Gehlot v State of Rajasthan
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 64