Anchal Grih Nirman Samiti & Ors. vs The State Of M.P. And Ors.
2021 Latest Caselaw 8455 MP

                                                                       1                            WP-4074-2004
                                      THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR MADHYA PRADESH,
                                                         AT JABALPUR
                                                               (DIVISION BENCH)
                                                               WP No. 4074 of 2004

                                  ANCHAL GRIH NIRMAN SAMITI & ORS.                                  .....Petitioners
                                                             Versus
                                  THE STATE OF M.P. AND ORS.                                     .....Respondents

                                  Coram :
                                              Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravi Malimath, Chief Justice
                                              Hon'ble Shri Justice Vijay Kumar Shukla
                                  Presence
                                  :
                                              Mr. Amalpushp Shroti, Advocate for the petitioners.
                                              Mr. R.K. Verma, Additional Advocate General for the
                                              respondents-State.
                                                                     ORDER (Oral)

(08-12-2021) Per: Ravi Malimath, Chief Justice The petitioners are House Building Societies. It is their case that they have developed residential colonies in the vicinity of Narela, Sankeri and Koluakala, Bhopal having constructed the houses. By the instant writ petition they seek to question the validity of Section 23(A) of the Madhya Pradesh Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973, namely, Act No.8 of 1996 as

ultra vires and unconstitutional. Their second prayer is for a writ of certiorari to quash the impugned notification dated 12.07.2004 vide Annexure P/8 to the writ petition issued by the respondent No.1 by declaring it to be void, inoperative and unenforceable and other consequential reliefs.

So far as validity of Section 23(A) is concerned, the said issue is no more res integra in terms of the judgment of this Court in Madan Parmaliya vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and others reported in 2007 (2) MPHT 221. The validity of the Act having been upheld, no further order could be passed so far as this prayer is concerned.

So far as second prayer regarding quashing of impugned notification issued under Section 23(A) is concerned, the same was questioned on the Signature Not Verified SAN ground that the urgency phrase in Section 23(A) has not been justified by the Digitally signed by SAIFAN KHAN Date: 2021.12.09 16:04:31 IST 2 WP-4074-2004 State. So in absence of they showing any urgency, the notification becomes bad in law.

Learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondents- State submits that irrespective of going into the merits, it is suffice to notice that the phrase "urgency", as it existed in Section 23(A) stood deleted w.e.f. 01.09.2005 by virtue of Amendment Act No.22 of 2005. Therefore, the

question raised for consideration in this writ petition, in our view, becomes academic. We do not find any reason to proceed further with regard to adjudicating of the urgency phrase, since the said phrase has been deleted. Hence, for these reasons no further orders can be passed in this matter.

The writ petition is disposed off accordingly.

                                         (RAVI MALIMATH)                              (VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA)
                                           CHIEF JUSTICE                                      JUDGE

                                  [email protected]




Signature Not Verified
  SAN




Digitally signed by SAIFAN KHAN
Date: 2021.12.09 16:04:31 IST