Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 11752 MP
Judgement Date : 6 September, 2022
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI
ON THE 6th OF SEPTEMBER, 2022
MISC. PETITION No. 1561 of 2021
BETWEEN:-
SURESH PATEL S/O LATE CHAJJU PATEL, AGED
ABOUT 44 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOUR R/O
VILLAGE TOKI GHOGHAL GOAN, TEHSIL
PUNASA (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI KAMLESH KUMAR MISHRA - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE LAND ACQUISITION REHABILITATION
OFFICER NHDC NHDC NO.6 INDRA SAGAR
OMKARESHWAR PROJECT KHANDWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. THE COLLECTOR KHANDWA DISTT.
KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. NHDC THROUGH EXECUTIVE ENGINEER SUB
DIVISION, NVDA OFFICE COMPLEX, KHANDWA,
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. G.K. PATEL - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
Th is petition coming on for hearing this day, th e court passed the
Signature Not Verified
SAN
following:
ORDER
Digitally signed by DHEERAJ PRATAP SINGH Date: 2022.09.06 18:57:23 IST
In this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed the order dated 24.07.2012 (Annexure P-3) passed in Reference Case No.19/2012 by the First Additional District Judge, District Khandwa (M.P.), whereby the reference case filed by the petitioner has been dismissed in default.
Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the outset, submits that this case is covered by the orders dated 22.02.2017 and 23.11.2019 passed by this Court in WP No.2297/2017 and MP No.1410/2019, wherein identical controversy was involved and this Court had disposed of that writ petitions relying on the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of Khazan Singh (dead) by
LRs vs Union of India (2002) 2 SCC 242.
On the other hand, learned Government Advocate for the State opposed the prayer and submitted that this writ petition is hopelessly barred by time for which no explanation has been put forth in the writ petition. Therefore, the petition is liable to be dismissed.
In view of the aforesaid as well as looking to the fact that in identical petition the impugned order has been set aside, this Court is inclined to set aside the impugned order 24.07.2012 (Annexure P-3).
The matter is remitted back to the trial Court for adjudication of reference case and the decision thereon shall be taken within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
It is made clear that if the reference case is answered in favour of the petitioner, he will not be entitled for the interest for the period 2012 till date
Signature Not Verified SAN because of the delay in filing the writ petition.
Digitally signed by DHEERAJ PRATAP This Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. SINGH Date: 2022.09.06 18:57:23 IST
With the aforesaid observations, this petition is disposed of.
(S. A. DHARMADHIKARI) JUDGE DPS
Signature Not Verified SAN
Digitally signed by DHEERAJ PRATAP SINGH Date: 2022.09.06 18:57:23 IST
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!