Prahalad Singh Mandloi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 18717 MP

                                                               1
                            IN     THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                   AT INDORE
                                                        BEFORE
                                        HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
                                               ON THE 6 th OF NOVEMBER, 2023
                                               WRIT PETITION No. 27892 of 2023

                           BETWEEN:-
                           PRAHALAD SINGH MANDLOI S/O LATE MEHTAB
                           SINGH, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
                           BUSINESS / AGRICULTURE R/O GRAM PERKHAD
                           TEHSIL MANAWAR DISTT. DHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                             .....PETITIONER
                           (SHRI KOUSTUBH PHADNIS - COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER.

                           AND
                           1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH TEHSILDAR
                                 MANAWAR TEHSIL DISTT. DHAR (MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)

                           2.    THE   DEPUTY  COLLECTOR    AND  LAND
                                 ACQUISITION   OFFICER SARDAR SAROVAR
                                 PROJECT, MANAWAR DIST. DHAR (MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)

                                                                                          .....RESPONDENTS
                           (MS. PRANJALI YAJURVEDI - P.L. FOR STATE) ON ADVANCE NOTICE

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

In the instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is seeking a direction to the respondents to consider the application of the petitioner under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act for reference.

2. An award was passed on 18.8.2003 to the tune of Rs.4,47,085/- on

Signature Not Verified acquisition of the petitioner's land. The petitioner filed an application before the Signed by: MUKTA CHANDRASHEKHAR KOUSHAL Signing time: 06-11-2023 17:50:52

Grievance Redressal Aurhority and same was dismissed by the said authority on 5.3.2020. The petitioner filed an appeal against the said order which was allowed and petitioner was directed to file an application for reference.

3. It is argued that petitioner could not prefer the reference under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act in respect of acquisition of land because of illiteracy and poor financial condition. He has relied on the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the matter of New Okhla Industrial Development Authority Vs. Omvir Singh and others, reported as 202 SCC Online SC 1726 in which the Supreme Court has affirmed the order passed by the High Court wherein the High Court has condoned the delay of 16/26 years. Thus, it

is submitted that the present petition may also be disposed of in the light of the aforesaid decision and admittedly the petitioner shall not be entitled to interest for the lost period.

4] Counsel for the State has opposed the prayer. 5] Having considered rival submissions, perusal of the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in the case of New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (Supra) in which in para 12, it has been observed as under:-

"12. So far as the submissions made on behalf of the appellant that the High Court has erred in condoning the delay of 16/26 years in preferring the appeal is concerned, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact that even while enhancing the amount of compensation and entertaining the appeal, the High Court has denied the interest for the period of delay and has exercised its discretion in favour of the claimants, we see no reason to interfere with the order passed by the High Court condoning the delay in preferring the appeal."

6 ] Applying the aforesaid analogy in the present petition, where the petitioner could not prefer the reference under Section 18 of the Act of 1894, this Court is of the opinion that if such an application is filed, the same can be

Signature Not Verified Signed by: MUKTA CHANDRASHEKHAR KOUSHAL Signing time: 06-11-2023 17:50:52

decided, in accordance with the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in the case of New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (Supra), in accordance with law and the petitioner shall not be entitled to claim any interest in respect of the period of delay.

7] Accordingly, the petition stands disposed off with a liberty to the petitioner to file an application before the Competent Court within three weeks time, which shall be decided, in accordance with law, also taking note of the observations made hereinabove.

(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) JUDGE MK

Signature Not Verified Signed by: MUKTA CHANDRASHEKHAR KOUSHAL Signing time: 06-11-2023 17:50:52