How to Get an Unauthorized Tea Stall Removed from a PWD Footpath — Legal Guide

One of my clients recently had a case which I am explaining below and if you are stuck in such similar situation, here is what to do.

Note: Due to attorney-client privilege, I cannot disclose complete case details or identify the actual parties involved. However, I am sharing the essential facts and legal approach so that if you find yourself in a similar situation, you can understand the available solutions and legal remedies.

TL;DR: If a tea stall is illegally operating on PWD footpath land and encroaching on your property, you can file complaints with the local PWD office and municipal corporation, use RTI to gather evidence, and if officials fail to act, approach the High Court through a writ petition. Criminal complaints for public nuisance and trespass are also possible. Document everything — photos, complaint records — and engage an advocate experienced in property and public nuisance cases.

In early 2025, a resident of Gomti Nagar, Lucknow approached the Chamber of Advocate Sudhir Rao. He had a persistent problem. A tea stall was operating on PWD footpath land right outside his residential property. The stall owner let customers place stools and benches on the client's private land. This caused constant obstruction, noise, and public nuisance. There were multiple violent altercations and threats. The client had submitted complaints to the local PWD office and the Lucknow Municipal Corporation. Nothing changed. The authorities seemed indifferent. Frustrated, he sought legal help. The office of Advocate Sudhir Rao examined the matter carefully. The key was treating it as both a civil encroachment and a public nuisance issue. Advocate Sudhir Rao and his office began by filing a formal legal notice to the PWD and municipal authorities. Simultaneously, an RTI application was submitted to verify if the tea stall had any valid license or lease. The RTI response confirmed no authorization existed. Armed with this evidence, the team filed a writ petition before the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court. The petition sought a mandamus — a court order directing the authorities to remove the encroachment and restore the footpath. The High Court issued notice to the respondents. Within eight weeks, the PWD and municipal officials inspected the site. The stall was identified as unauthorized. It was dismantled. The client's property boundary was restored. Advocate Sudhir Rao's specific expertise in land-use and public nuisance litigation — particularly the procedural nuances of writ jurisdiction and RTI-backed evidence gathering — was critical in obtaining this swift and decisive outcome.

Key Facts of the Case

• The tea stall was situated on PWD footpath land, which is government property meant for public passage.
• Customers of the stall were placing stools and benches on the client's private property, constituting trespass and encroachment.
• Repeated complaints to the PWD office and Lucknow Municipal Corporation yielded no action.
• An RTI application confirmed that the stall had no valid license or permission to operate on that footpath.
• The case was filed as a writ petition (Public Interest Litigation / Mandamus) before the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court.
• The High Court issued a direction to the respondents to inspect and remove the unauthorized structure within eight weeks.
• Professional legal handling — combining RTI, criminal nuisance provisions, and writ jurisdiction — was decisive in securing compliance.

The Direct Legal Answer

Which authority has the power to remove an unauthorized tea stall from a PWD footpath?

The primary authority is the Public Works Department (PWD) of the state, which owns and controls the footpath. Additionally, the municipal corporation (such as the Lucknow Municipal Corporation) has powers under municipal laws to remove unauthorized structures and encroachments on public land. The local police can also act under criminal law for public nuisance (Section 133 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, which corresponds to provisions under BNSS 2023) and for causing obstruction to public way.

What if complaints to authorities don't work?

You escalate. File an RTI to gather documentary proof that no permission exists. Send a formal legal notice to the PWD and municipality. Then file a writ petition before the High Court seeking a mandamus — a court order compelling them to act. The High Court has the power to direct government authorities to perform their statutory duties.

Can I file a criminal complaint?

Yes. An unauthorized stall causing obstruction to a public way can attract criminal liability for public nuisance under Section 133 of the BNSS (analogous to Section 133 CrPC) and for trespass if it extends onto your private property. You can file an FIR at the local police station. If the police refuse, you can approach the Superintendent of Police or file a private complaint before a Magistrate.

Advice in Such Cases

Consult with Lawyer: The very basic and important step to start is talk to Lawyer / advocate. You should not hesitate in paying his consultation fee i.e. might be in range of Rs. 10,000 to 50,000 depends case to case. He is helping you in this situation to come out. He is expert in the domain and can help you explain the procedure which you might have never explored. A good lawyer can get the issues resolved much faster than you think.

Second, gather all documentary evidence from the start — photos, videos, complaint acknowledgments, RTI responses. These form the backbone of your case. Third, consider sending a legal notice under Section 80 of the CPC to the government authority before filing a writ. This is a procedural prerequisite in many cases. This type of matter involves nuanced interplay between property law, criminal nuisance provisions, and administrative law. An advocate who regularly handles public nuisance and land-use cases will navigate these procedural traps effectively — a general practitioner might miss key steps like the Section 80 notice or the proper format for a writ petition.

Applicable Sections of Law

This case involves both civil and criminal aspects. Under civil law, the relevant provisions include the Specific Relief Act, 1963 (for injunctions and restoration of possession), and the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (for trespass and encroachment principles). Under criminal law, Section 133 of the BNSS (Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023) deals with public nuisance — it empowers a Magistrate to order removal of any obstruction on a public way. Section 318 BNS (Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023) criminalizes criminal trespass. For writ jurisdiction, Article 226 of the Constitution allows the High Court to issue directions to any authority for enforcement of fundamental and legal rights.

Jurisdiction — Where to File the Case

For a writ petition, the jurisdictional High Court is the appropriate forum — in this case, the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court. For criminal complaints regarding public nuisance or trespass, the local Magistrate's court (first class Magistrate) at the place where the obstruction occurs has jurisdiction. For civil suits for injunction or removal of encroachment, the civil court with territorial jurisdiction over the property (where the footpath is located) and pecuniary jurisdiction based on the value of the suit will handle it. Filing in the wrong court can result in delays and dismissal for lack of jurisdiction.

Limitation Period

For filing a writ petition, there is no strict limitation period under the Limitation Act, 1963, but courts expect promptness — typically within a few months of the cause of action. For a civil suit for possession or injunction, Article 65 of the Limitation Act provides a 12-year period from the date of encroachment. For criminal complaints regarding public nuisance, no limitation applies, but evidence must be fresh. Missing limitation can be fatal; however, courts may condone delay with sufficient cause shown.

Interim Reliefs Available

You can seek interim orders from the court even before the full case is decided. Under Order 39 of the CPC, a temporary injunction can be obtained to stop the stall owner from encroaching further or causing nuisance. A status quo order may be issued to prevent any change in the situation. In writ proceedings, the High Court can issue an interim direction to the authorities to inspect and take action during the pendency of the petition. These early reliefs are often decisive in preventing the encroachment from becoming permanent.

If You Are the Victim

• Document all instances of obstruction and nuisance with dates, photos, and videos.
• Maintain copies of all complaints filed with authorities and their acknowledgments.
• File an RTI to obtain official confirmation of whether the stall has legal permission.
• Send a legal notice to the PWD and municipal authorities under Section 80 CPC.
• Do not confront the encroacher directly — law enforcement can escalate violence. Let the legal process work.

Documents You Must Keep Ready

• Identity proof — Aadhaar card, voter ID, or passport.
• Proof of ownership or possession of your property (sale deed, registry, tax receipts).
• Photographs and videos of the encroachment and nuisance.
• Copies of all complaints filed (with acknowledgment receipts).
• RTI application and response (if obtained).
• Legal notice sent to authorities (if applicable).
• Any police complaint/FIR or diary entry related to the matter.
• Witness list of neighbors or others affected by the nuisance.

What Evidence Is Required?

• Primary evidence: Photographs/videos showing the stall on the footpath and its extension onto your property.
• Primary evidence: Official RTI response confirming no valid permission exists.
• Primary evidence: Copies of complaints filed with government authorities.
• Secondary evidence: Affidavits from neighbors or passersby who have witnessed the obstruction.
• Secondary evidence: Police diary entries or DDR (Daily Diary Report) if you reported the issue.
• Documentary evidence: Survey maps or property documents showing the boundary of your land and the footpath alignment.

How Courts Typically Approach Such Cases

Courts view unauthorized encroachments on public footpaths seriously. They recognize that such encroachments violate public right of way and often lead to nuisance. The courts typically issue directions to the PWD and municipal corporation to inspect and remove the encroachment within a specified time. If the authorities fail to act, courts may order contempt proceedings. In cases where private property is also affected, courts grant injunctions to prevent further trespass. The emphasis is on restoring the public land to its legitimate use and protecting the aggrieved party's rights.

Timeline of Legal Process

• Step 1 – Complaint to Authorities: 1-2 weeks for initial response; often ignored or delayed.
• Step 2 – RTI Application: 30 days for response under RTI Act.
• Step 3 – Legal Notice: 30 days mandatory period under Section 80 CPC before filing common law suit.
• Step 4 – Filing Writ Petition: 2-4 weeks for drafting, filing, and first hearing.
• Step 5 – Court Directions: 4-8 weeks for notice to respondents and interim orders.
• Step 6 – Compliance by Authorities: Varies — can be 2-4 months if court order is specific and strict.
• Step 7 – Final Disposal: Writ petitions in High Court typically resolve within 6-12 months.

Understanding the Costs

The total cost of a matter like this varies significantly from one case to the next — it depends on the complexity of the dispute, the forum involved, the number of hearings, and the specific facts of your situation. There is no single fixed figure that applies to everyone.

A professional advocate can give you an accurate estimate only after reviewing all your facts and documents in a consultation.

Can the Matter Be Settled Out of Court?

Out-of-court settlement is possible but limited in this type of case. Since the encroachment is on government footpath land, the real parties are the public authorities. You cannot settle with the stall owner directly to occupy government land. However, if the stall owner agrees to relocate voluntarily, you can inform the authorities and withdraw the petition. Alternatively, mediation before a Lok Adalat can be attempted for pending cases. In criminal nuisance complaints, the offence under Section 133 BNSS is generally not compoundable — it requires court adjudication. Settlement is most viable in civil suits between private parties, but here the primary relief is against the state.

Common Mistakes People Make

• Delay in taking legal action: The longer you wait, the more entrenched the encroachment becomes, making removal harder.
• Confronting the stall owner directly: This often leads to violence and can complicate your legal position.
• Relying only on oral complaints: Without written records, authorities and courts have no evidence of your efforts.
• Not filing an RTI: Many people skip this crucial step — the RTI response becomes powerful documentary proof that the stall is unauthorized.
• Engaging a lawyer without domain-specific experience: Public nuisance and land encroachment cases require knowledge of writ jurisdiction, Section 80 CPC, and procedural nuances. A general practitioner may miss the RTI angle or fail to file the writ properly, resulting in delays or dismissal.
• Posting on social media during the case: This can prejudice proceedings and be used against you in court as contempt or defamation material.

FAQs People Normally Have

Can I have the tea stall removed without going to court?

Possibly, if the authorities act on your complaint. But if they don't, court intervention through a writ petition becomes necessary. The RTI response often pressures them to act before court orders.

How long will it take to get the encroachment removed?

If the authorities comply with a court order, 2-4 months. If they resist, it could take 6-12 months with contempt proceedings. A good advocate accelerates this process.

Can I claim compensation for the nuisance?

Yes, in a civil suit for trespass and nuisance, you can claim damages for loss of enjoyment of property and any monetary loss. However, this requires separate proceedings from the removal petition.

What if the stall owner threatens me?

Immediately file an FIR for criminal intimidation (Section 308 BNS) and trespass. Do not engage physically. Document all threats with photos, videos, or witness statements.

Is it worth filing a writ petition for a small tea stall?

Absolutely — unchecked encroachments on footpaths multiply. A successful writ sets a precedent and discourages others. Also, your right to peaceful enjoyment of property is fundamental.

This article is general legal information, not legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate about your specific situation.

Advocate Sudhir Rao, Supreme Court of India