Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt.Indira Gautam vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 19 June, 2023
Author: Vivek Agarwal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
ON THE 19 th OF JUNE, 2023
WRIT PETITION No. 13128 of 2007
BETWEEN:-
1. SMT. RATNI BAI WD/O RAM PRASAD, AGED
ABOUT 65 YEARS.
2. KANHAIYA LAL (NOW DECEASED).
3. CHHOTELAL S/O RAM PRASAD, AGED ABOUT 45
YEARS.
4. MITTHU LAL S/O RAM PRASAD, AGED ABOUT 40
YEARS.
5. SARASWATI BAI D/O RAM PRASAD, AGED ABOUT
38 YEARS.
6. BATI BAI D/O RAM PRASAD, AGED ABOUT 36
YEARS.
ALL R/O VILLAGE UMRAOGANJ, TEHSIL
GOHARGANJ, DISITRICT RAISEN (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI R.P. KHARE - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR:
COLLECTOR RAISEN (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. COMMISSIONER BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. BOARD OF REVENUE GWALIOR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
Signature Not Verified
SAN
4. ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR, RAISEN (MADHYA
Digitally signed by PUSHPENDRA PATEL
Date: 2023.06.21 19:00:28 IST
PRADESH)
2
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI MANAS MANI VERMA - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
WRIT PETITION No. 13130 of 2007
BETWEEN:-
GOVERDHAN S/O KHUSILAL, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
R/O VILLAGE UMRAOGANJ, TEHSIL GOHARGANJ,
DISTRICT RAISEN (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI R.P. KHARE - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR:
COLLECTOR RAISEN (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. COM M IS S ION ER DISTT. BHOPAL (MADHYA
PRADESH)
3. BOARD OF REVENUE DISTT. GWALIOR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
4. ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR DISTT. RAISEN
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI MANAS MANI VERMA - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
WRIT PETITION No. 13131 of 2007
BETWEEN:-
SURESH KUMAR S/O DAYALAL, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
R/O VILLAGE UMRAOGANG, TEHSIL GOHARGANJ,
DISTRICT RAISEN (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI R.P. KHARE - ADVOCATE)
AND
Signature Not Verified
SAN 1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
THE COLLECTOR RAISEN (MADHYA PRADESH)
Digitally signed by PUSHPENDRA PATEL
Date: 2023.06.21 19:00:28 IST
2. COMMISSIONER BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
3
3. BOARD OF REVENUE GWALIOR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
4. ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR RAISEN (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI MANAS MANI VERMA - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
WRIT PETITION No. 13189 of 2007
BETWEEN:-
DHANNALAL S/O S/O RAM PRASAD CHAMAR, AGED
ABOUT 55 YEARS, UMRAOGANJ TEHSIL GOHOURGANJ
DISTT RAISEN (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI R.P. KHARE - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH :
COLLECTOR RAISEN (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. COMMISSIONER BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. BOARD OF REVENUE GWALIOR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
4. ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR RAISEN (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI MANAS MANI VERMA - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
WRIT PETITION No. 15840 of 2007
BETWEEN:-
SANJAY KUMAR GAUTAM S/O GOVERDHAN GOUTAM,
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, BAMHI, TEH. &
DIST.JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
Signature Not Verified
SAN
.....PETITIONER
Digitally signed by PUSHPENDRA PATEL
Date: 2023.06.21 19:00:28 IST (BY SHRI R.P. KHARE - ADVOCATE)
4
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH JABALPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR JABALPUR DISTT.
JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI MANAS MANI VERMA - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
WRIT PETITION No. 1971 of 2008
BETWEEN:-
SMT. INDIRA GAUTAM S/O W/O LATE SHRI SUBHASH
GAUTAM, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, GRAM BRAHMNI
TEHSIL AND DISTRICT .JABALPUR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI R.P. KHARE - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR:
COLLECTOR JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR JABALPUR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
3. ADDITIONAL TEHSILDAR PANAGAR TEHSIL &
DISTRICT JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI MANAS MANI VERMA - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
T h is petition coming on for orders this day, t h e cou rt passed the
following:
ORDER
These petitions are filed by the land allottees being aggrieved of the order
Signature Not Verified
of the Board of Revenue passed in different revision case numbers, one of them
SAN
being 1260-PBR/06, decided on 31.05.2007.
Digitally signed by PUSHPENDRA PATEL
Date: 2023.06.21 19:00:28 IST
2. Brief facts leading to the present writ petitions are that petitioners
claiming themselves to be landless persons had applied for allotment of land on
Patta. Tehsildar had issued Pattas in their favour. Against this order, a
complaint was made to the Additional Collector, Raisen. Additional Collector
has taken up the matter on report of the Sub Divisional Officer, Gauharganj and
vide order dated 03.07.2004, held that concerned Tehsildar had failed to adopt
the procedure prescribed under the law and, therefore, quashed the orders of
allotment and remanded the matter with a direction that since there was a ban on
the conversion of Charnoi to Kabil cast vide Revenue Department circular
No.F-30-18/2002/Seven/2A Bhopal dated 21.01.2003, therefore, proceedings of
allotment be drawn after obtaining detailed instructions from the State
Government. With these observations he had remanded the matter to the Sub
Divisional Officer (Revenue), Gauharganj.
3. This order was challenged before the Commissioner, Bhopal division,
Bhopal, which vide order dated 12.06.2006 maintained the said order, therefore,
all the revision petitions were dismissed. Against the said order, second revision
was filed before the learned Board of Revenue, which also recorded categorical
findings that there were lacuna in the proceedings undertaken by the Tehsildar,
Ishtehar was neither signed by the Tehsildar, nor there was service report. There
was lack of classification of the proposed beneficiaries. There was no mention
of the fact that how land in access of 2% converting Charnoi to Kabil cast
could have been done and then advertisement was issued on 25.02.2001
mentioning names of the 11 persons, whereas on the same date names of the
proposed beneficiaries were called for by the Tehsildar from the concerned
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Patwari.
Digitally signed by PUSHPENDRA PATEL
Date: 2023.06.21 19:00:28 IST
4. It also recorded a fact that allotment of Government land is carried out
under the provisions of Revenue circular but proceedings were drawn under
MPLRC and, therefore, upholding the judgments of the Additional Collector
and the Commissioner, Board of Revenue refused to show indulgence, hence,
these petitions.
5. Shri Manas Mani Verma, learned Government Advocate submits that
there is no error in the orders of remand passed by the Additional Collector. No
prejudice has been caused to the petitioners and if they are otherwise eligible,
their cases will be considered by the State in accordance with law.
5. In view of such submissions and taking this fact into consideration that
there were several irregularities in the process of allotment and those
irregularities could not have been cured by a subsequent action, impugned
orders passed by the learned Board of Revenue, Commissioner and Additional
Collector, cannot be said to be illegal or arbitrary. Therefore, petitions fail and
are dismissed.
6. However, it is directed that Sub Divisional Officer, Gauharganj, District
Raisen shall consider pending applications on their own merits strictly in
accordance of law and shall decide them within a period of 60 days from the
date of receipt of certified copy of the order being passed today.
7. In above terms, these petitions are disposed of.
(VIVEK AGARWAL)
JUDGE
pp
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by PUSHPENDRA PATEL
Date: 2023.06.21 19:00:28 IST
