Madhya Pradesh High Court
Vijay Singh Jatav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 September, 2021
Author: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
1
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
WP No.15955/2021
Vijay Singh Jatav vs. State of M.P. & Ors.
Gwalior, Dated : 01.09.2021
Shri Sanjay Singh, Counsel for the petitioner through video
conferencing.
Shri Deepak Khot, Government Advocate for the State.
This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has
been filed seeking following reliefs:
^^;kfpdkdrkZ izkFkZuk djrk gS fd ;kfpdkdrkZ }kjk
izLrqr ;kfpdk Lohdkj dh tkdj izfr;kfpdkdrkZx.k
dz-4 yxk;r 6 dks funsZf'kr fd;k tkos fd 'kklu
dh ;kstukvks dk ykHk ik= O;fDr;ksa dks fn;k tkos ,oa
vik= O;fDr;ksa dks mDr lwph;ksa esa ls uke dkVdj
jktLo dh olwyh dh tkos ,oa lacaf/kr iz'kklfud
vf/kdkfj;ksa fo:) dk;Zokgh fd;s tkus dh d`ik djsaA
vU; lgk;rk tks ekuuh; U;k;ky; mfpr le>s
;kfpdkdrkZ dks fnykbZ tkosA^^
It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that although
the petitioner has not prayed any relief for himself but he has
represented to different authorities for taking action against
respondents No.4 to 6.
Per contra, it is submitted by the counsel for the respondents
that a writ petition for the said purposes is not maintainable and the
petitioner should approach the Investigating Agency as the allegations
involves disputed question of fact which cannot be adjudicated in writ
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
WP No.15955/2021
Vijay Singh Jatav vs. State of M.P. & Ors.
petition. To buttress his contention, the counsel for the respondents
has relied upon the judgment passed by Division Bench of this Court
in the case of Kanhaiyalal Vishwakarma vs. State of M.P. & Ors.
reported in 2011(1) MPLJ 472.
Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
In the present writ petition, the petitioner has not prayed for
any relief for himself and it is alleged by the petitioner that the
respondents No.4 to 6 are involved in corrupt practices.
The Division Bench of this Court in the case of Kanhaiyalal
Vishwakarma (supra) has held as under:
8. The apex Court in the case of
Guruvayoor Devaswom Managing Committee and
another vs. C.K. Rajan and others, (2003) 7 SCC
546, wherein the allegations were made regarding
mismanagement of the affairs of the Guruvayoor
Temple by a devotee, found that the affairs of the
temple are governed by the provisions of the
Guruvayoor Devaswom Act, 1978, wherein forums
have been created for ventilating the grievances of
the affected persons. In that backdrop it was
observed in Para 60 of the judgment that ordinarily,
therefore, such forums should be moved at the first
instance. It was further held that the State
Government should be asked to look into the
grievances of the aggrieved devotees, both as
parens patriae as also in discharge of its statutory
duties.
9. In view of the aforesaid enunciation of
law by the Supreme Court facts of the case in hand
may be examined. The allegations made by the
petitioner required to be enquired into the
Appropriate Forum, wherein detailed enquiry
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
WP No.15955/2021
Vijay Singh Jatav vs. State of M.P. & Ors.
would be conducted as per provisions prescribed in
the Act and an opportunity of hearing would be
afforded to the respondent No.5. Therefore, the
petitioner should avail the remedy provided under
the Act.
In view of the allegations made by the petitioner, this Court is
of the considered opinion that the petitioner has a remedy to agitate
his grievance under the provisions of M.P. Lokayukta and Upa
Lokayukta Adhiniyam as well as before any Investigating Agency
competent to investigate the matter.
Accordingly, the petitioner fails and is hereby dismissed.
(G.S. Ahluwalia)
(alok) Judge
ALOK KUMAR
2021.09.01 16:34:12 +05'30'
