Bharat Scout And Guide Madhya ... vs Airport Authority Of India
2023 Latest Caselaw 12977 MP

                                                       1
                            IN    THE     HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                               AT JABALPUR
                                                    BEFORE
                                      HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
                                             ON THE 10 th OF AUGUST, 2023
                                            WRIT PETITION No. 5524 of 2023

                           BETWEEN:-
                           BHARAT SCOUT AND GUIDE MADHYA PRADESH
                           THROUGH IN CHARGE ASSISTANT STATE ORGANIZING
                           COMMISSIONER LALIT KUMAR MISHRA S/O SHRI
                           RAMESHWAR DAYAL AGE AROUND 34 YEARS OFFICE
                           AT SHANTI MARG, SHYAMLA HILLS, BHOPAL AND
                           OFFICE OF JOINT DIRECTOR EDUCATION, NEAR HIGH
                           COURT BUILDING (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                              .....PETITIONER
                           (BY SHRI ANURAG GOHIL - ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           1.    AIRPORT AUTHORITY OF INDIA THROUGH DGM
                                 RAJA BHOJ AIRPORT GANDHI NAGAR GOVT. OF
                                 M.P. VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL (MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)

                           2.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH, THROUGH
                                 CHIEF SECRETARY SECRETARIAT, ARERA HILLS,
                                 BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           3.    PUBLIC WORK DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF
                                 MADHYA PRADESH, THROUGH PRINCIPAL
                                 S E C R E TA R Y SECRETARIAT, ARERA HILLS,
                                 BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           4.    DEPARTMENT OF AVIATION, GOVERNMENT OF
                                 MADHYA PRADESH, THROUGH PRINCIPAL
                                 S E C R E TA R Y SECRETARIAT, ARERA HILLS,
                                 BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           5.    COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
                                 NEAR CHETAK BRIDGE, GAUTAM NAGAR,
                                 BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           6.    COLLECTOR CUM DISTRICT MAGISTRATE,
                                 BHOPAL OLD SECRETARIAT BHOPAL DITRICT
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMITABH
RANJAN
Signing time: 11-08-2023
11:42:22
                                                       2
                                 BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                         .....RESPONDENTS
                           (RESPONDENT No.1 BY SHRI PRAKASH UPADHYAY - ADVOCATE )
                           (RESPONDENTS No. 2, 3, 5 & 6 BY SHRI JITENDRA SHRIVASTAVA - PANEL
                           LAWYER.

                                 This petition coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
                           following:
                                                                ORDER

This writ petition is filed seeking issuance of appropriate direction to the respondent authorities to not to dispossess the petitioner from the land bearing Khasra no. 3, 4/2/2, 4/2/3, 11, 12,13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19/1/1, 20/1/2 situated at Gandhi Nagar, Bhopal without due process of law. In addition to above, cost

of the petition is claimed.

2. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has read the communication dated 25.06.1979 made by the Superintending Engineer, Public Works Department, Bhopal, Circle - Bhopal to the Executive Engineer, Public Works Department Bhopal, Division No.2, Bhopal, wherein, in the subject, it is mentioned that for the State Training Institute of Bharat Scouts and Guides building situated at Aerodrome Bhopal may be given. Thereafter, attention of this Court is drawn towards the another communication made by the Divisional Education Superintendent to the Superintending Engineer dated July, 1979. Placing reliance on these documents it is submitted that the property belongs to Bharat Scouts and Guides. They are in possession, they cannot be evicted in an arbitrary and illegal manner. Annexure P-2 is minutes of proceedings which were drawn between various functionaries of Bharat Scouts and Guides, State Government and the Airport Authority of India. Reading from those proceedings, it is submitted that, it is mentioned that out of 20.67

Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMITABH RANJAN Signing time: 11-08-2023 11:42:22

acres of land except for 7.50 acres of land on which training center is constructed vacant land shall be handed over to the Airport Authority of India and the said Authority shall pay a sum of Rs.06 crores and then on allotment of alternate site by the Collector, Bharat Scouts and Guides shall vacate 7.50 acres of land.

3. Reading from these documents, it is submitted that petitioner is in possession and they cannot be unlawfully evicted from the said land.

4. Shri Prakash Upadhyay submits that the land in question is recorded in the name of Airport Authority of India as is mentioned in the minutes of meeting (Annexure P-2) itself. Petitioner has lost in the Civil Suit. Reading from the copy of the judgment dated 19.02.2004 passed in RCS No. 285-A of 2002 it is pointed out that learned Second Civil Judge Class-I, Bhopal in para 10 of its Judgment has categorically observed that plaintiff Bharat Scout and Guide failed to prove their title and possession. They are apparently encroachers. The land is of the ownership of the Central Government and under such premise, it is held that in terms of Section 2(E) of the Lok Parisar Bedakhali Adhiniyam, the notice given by the State Officer under Section 5(1) of the Lok Parisar Bedakhali Adhiniyam to the plaintiff organization for eviction cannot be said to be against the law and therefore, the suit was dismissed.

5. It is pointed out that the appeal which was filed against the said order

dated 19.02.2004 was registered as MCA No. 04 of 2005 and that was dismissed for want of prosecution by the Court of First Addl. Judge to the First Addl. District Judge, Bhopal vide order dated 11.02.2010. Petitioner had filed an application for restoration that too has been dismissed vide order dated 13.09.2017. Against that order, a Revision was filed in the High Court which was registered as Civil Revision No. 583 of 2017 and that has been converted in Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMITABH RANJAN Signing time: 11-08-2023 11:42:22

to Misc. Appeal but there are no orders of stay in the said Misc. Appeal.

6. In view of such facts, it is submitted that petitioner has no right to continue on the land and if an arrangement was drawn to pay some compensation for the activities of the petitioner, then that cannot be taken as a matter of right.

7. Shri Upadhyay further submits that complete possession of the land was taken on 01.03.2023 vide Annexure R-12 with the help of the Collector.

8. Though Shri Anurag Gohil disputes this document, but fact of the matter is that copy of the return/reply as filed by the respondent No.1 was received by the counsel on 03.05.2023. Thus, once copy of the reply was received, it was open to the petitioner to have filed rejoinder, rebutting the documents with factual material, but no such rejoinder is filed by the petitioner to said return/reply.

9. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the records.

10. Certain facts are evident from the documents filed by the petitioner themselves. Firstly, they have no title in the said land. Communication made by the Divisional Education Superintendent as has been filed by the petitioner clearly makes a mention of the fact that Basic Training Institute situated on Bhopal-Biaora road has a Hostel and that was directed to be handed over to the Education Department so that the activities of Scout and Guide which are co- curricular activities of the Education Department may be undertaken. Thus, the proposal was to handover the building in favour of the School Education Department and not in faovur of Bharat Scouts and Guides.

11. Another communication made by office of Joint Director, Public

Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMITABH RANJAN Signing time: 11-08-2023 11:42:22

Instructions, reveals that a sum of Rs.49,500/- was sanctioned by the School Education Department for repair of Barrack No. 2 & 3 in which activities of Scouting were to be carried out. Therefore, it is apparent from this communication that no amount was spent by the Bharat Scout and Guide.

12. Another Communication dated 26.08.1985 addressed by the Under Secretary, State of Madhya Pradesh School Education Department to the Commissioner Public Instructions is clear that the State had sanctioned a sum of Rs.49,500/- for repair of barrack No. 2 & 3 and that amount was to be adjusted against budget head No.27-276- Shiksha-08- Samanya- 05- Anya Vyay- 007- Nirman Karya-14.

13. Another communication by the State Government to the Commissioner, Public Instructions makes it clear that the aforesaid amount will be treated to have been spent under the head mentioned in the said order.

14. Thus, it is evident that at best petitioner can be treated to be a lessee of School Education Department and they have no locus on the said property beyond that.

15. Even the proceedings which were drawn as are contained in Annexure P-2 are not binding on any of the parties and they cannot be enforced without approaching the appropriate Court having competent jurisdiction.

16. In view of the such facts, when the land admittedly belongs to the respondent No.1 as is mentioned in the proceedings which has been signed by several functionary of Bharat Scout and Guide and as is contained in Annexure P-2 then for handing over that land in favour of the respondent No.1, petitioner cannot claim that they have a vested interest specially after they have lost in the Civil Suit and then in the Appeal which was filed challenging the order passed by the learned Civil Judge.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMITABH RANJAN Signing time: 11-08-2023 11:42:22

17. In view of such facts and also taking this matter into consideration that vide Annexure R-12 possession of the land in question has already been taken by the Airport Authority of India for a larger social and commercial cause, no indulgence can be shown in the matter at the behest of the petitioner.

18. Petition being devoid of merit, deserve to fail and is hereby dismissed.

(VIVEK AGARWAL) JUDGE Amitabh

Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMITABH RANJAN Signing time: 11-08-2023 11:42:22