Madhya Pradesh High Court
Maya Devi Shikshan Sansthan Thr. Its ... vs Pradeep Soni on 7 February, 2024
Author: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
Bench: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEVNARAYAN MISHRA
ON THE 7 th OF FEBRUARY, 2024
CONTEMPT PETITION CIVIL No. 798 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
ARJUN SINGH S/O DAYARAM SINGH, AGED 66 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE R/O VILLAGE
NAGUKHEDI DISTT. DEWAS (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(SHRI AJAY KUMAR MIMROT, COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER).
AND
1. PRADEEP SONI COMPETENT AUTHORITY / LAND
ACQUISITION OFFICER, [SUB DIVISIONAL
OFFICER (REVENUE)], DEWEAS (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. SHRI M.L. PURBIA, PROJECT DIRECTOR,
NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA,
IMPLEMENTATION UNIT, B-21/9 MAHANANDA
NAGAR, UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI PADMNABH SAXENA, COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NO.1).(SHRI
YOGESH BHATNAGAR, COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NO.2)
CONTEMPT PETITION CIVIL No. 799 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
BALIRAM S/O JAGDHARI PASHI, AGED 75 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST, VILLAGE NAGUKHEDI,
TEHSIL AND DISTRICT DEWAS (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(SHRI AJAY KUMAR MIMROT, COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER).
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SREEVIDYA
Signing time: 09-02-
2024 10:34:50
2
AND
1. PRADEEP SONI, COMPETENT AUTHORITY, LAND
ACQUISITION OFFICER, [SUB DIVISIONAL
OFFICER (REVENUE)] DEWAS (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. SHRI M.L. PURBIA, PROJECT DIRECTOR,
NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA,
IMPLEMENTATION UNIT B-21/9 MAHANAND
NAGAR UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI PADMNABH SAXENA, COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NO.1).(SHRI
YOGESH BHATNAGAR, COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NO.2)
CONTEMPT PETITION CIVIL No. 800 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
1. VISHNU KUNWAR W/O SURENDRA SINGH, AGED
50 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HOUSEWIFE, VILLAGE
LASUDIYA PARMAR, TEHSIL SANWER, DISTRICT
INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. JAGDISH KUNWAR W/O AJIT SINGH, AGED 48
YE A R S , OCCUPATION: HOUSEWIFE, VILLAGE
LASUDIYA PARMAR, TEHSIL SANWER, DISTRICT
INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. PAWAN KUMAR W/O BHAGWAN SINGH, AGED 52
YE A R S , OCCUPATION: HOUSEWIFE VILLAGE
LASUDIYA PARMAR, TEHSIL SANWER, DISTRICT
INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONERS
(SHRI AJAY KUMAR MIMROT, COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONERS).
AND
1. PRADEEP SONI, COMPETENT AUTHORITY, LAND
ACQUISITION OFFICER, [SUB DIVISIONAL
OFFICER (REVENUE)] DEWAS (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. SHRI M.L. PURBIA, PROJECT DIRECTOR,
NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA,
IMPLEMENTATION UNIT, B-21/9 MAHANANDA
NAGAR, UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SREEVIDYA
Signing time: 09-02-
2024 10:34:50
3
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI PADMNABH SAXENA, COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NO.1).(SHRI
YOGESH BHATNAGAR, COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NO.2)
CONTEMPT PETITION CIVIL No. 801 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
1. SHREEKISHAN S/O BHAGIRATH LODHI, AGED 60
Y E A R S , OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE R/O
VILLAGE NAGUKHEDI, TEHSIL AND DISTRICT
DEWAS (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. GORISHANKAR S/O BHAGIRATH LODHI, AGED 58
Y E A R S , OCCUPATION: R/O AGRICULTURE
VILLAGE, NAGUKHEDI TEHSIL AND DISTRICT
DEWAS (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONERS
(SHRI AJAY KUMAR MIMROT, COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONERS).
AND
1. PRADEEP SONI, COMPETENT AUTHORITY, LAND
ACQUISITION OFFICER, [SUB DIVISIONAL
OFFICER (REVENUE)] DEWAS (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. SHRI M.L. PURBIA, PROJECT DIRECTOR,
NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA,
IMPLEMENTATION UNIT, B-21/9 MAHANANDA
NAGAR, UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI PADMNABH SAXENA, COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NO.1).(SHRI
YOGESH BHATNAGAR, COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NO.2)
CONTEMPT PETITION CIVIL No. 802 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
1. RAJENDRA KUMAR S/O UTTAM NARAYAN
SINGH, AGED 60 YEARS, OCCUPATION: BUSINESS
KARMCHARI COLONY, TEHSIL AND DISTRICT
DEWAS (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. NEETA W/O RAJENDRA KUMAR, AGED 53 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: HOUSEWIFE KARMCHARI COLONY
TEHSIL AND DISTRICT DEWAS (MADHYA
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SREEVIDYA
Signing time: 09-02-
2024 10:34:50
4
PRADESH)
.....PETITIONERS
(SHRI AJAY KUMAR MIMROT, COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONERS).
AND
1. PRADEEP SONI, COMPETENT AUTHORITY, LAND
ACQUISITION OFFICER [SUB DIVISIONAL
OFFICER (REVENUE)] DEWAS (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. SHRI M.L. PURBIA, PROJECT DIRECTOR,
NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA,
IMPLEMENTATION UNIT B-21/9 MAHANAND
NAGAR UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI PADMNABH SAXENA, COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NO.1).(SHRI
YOGESH BHATNAGAR, COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NO.2)
CONTEMPT PETITION CIVIL No. 803 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
RAJENDRA S/O RAMESHCHANDRA, AGED 65 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: BUSINESS R/O BHAGAT SINGH MARG
DEWAS (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(SHRI AJAY KUMAR MIMROT, COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER).
AND
1. PRADEEP SONI, COMPETENT AUTHORITY, LAND
ACQUISITION OFFICER, [SUB DIVISIONAL
OFFICER (REVENUE)] DEWAS (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. SHRI M.L. PURBIA, PROJECT DIRECTOR,
NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA,
IMPLEMENTATION UNIT, B-21/9 MAHANAND
NAGAR UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI PADMNABH SAXENA, COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NO.1).(SHRI
YOGESH BHATNAGAR, COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NO.2)
CONTEMPT PETITION CIVIL No. 804 of 2023
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SREEVIDYA
Signing time: 09-02-
2024 10:34:50
5
BETWEEN:-
MAYA DEVI SHIKSHAN SANSTHAN THR. ITS
PRESIDENT SHYAMLAL S/O TEJRAM, AGED 78 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: BUSINESS R/O VILLAGE NAGUKHEDI
DISTT. DEWAS (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(SHRI AJAY KUMAR MIMROT, COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER).
AND
1. PRADEEP SONI, COMPETENT AUTHORITY, LAND
ACQUISITION OFFICER, [SUB DIVISIONAL
OFFICER (REVENUE)] DEWAS (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. SHRI M.L. PURBIA, PROJECT DIRECTOR
NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA,
IMPLEMENTATION UNIT, B-21/9 MAHANANDA
NAGAR, UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI PADMNABH SAXENA, COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NO.1).(SHRI
YOGESH BHATNAGAR, COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NO.2)
CONTEMPT PETITION CIVIL No. 805 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
MAYA DEVI W/O SHYAMLAL, AGED 74 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE VILLAGE NAGUKHEDI,
TEHSIL AND DISTRICT DEWAS (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(SHRI AJAY KUMAR MIMROT, COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER).
AND
1. PRADEEP SONI, COMPETENT AUTHORITY, LAND
ACQUISITION OFFICER [SUB DIVISIONAL
OFFICER (REVENUE)] DEWAS (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. SHRI M.L. PURBIA, PROJECT DIRECTOR
NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA,
IMPLEMENTATION UNIT, B-21/9 MAHANAND
NAGAR UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SREEVIDYA
Signing time: 09-02-
2024 10:34:50
6
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI PADMNABH SAXENA, COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NO.1).(SHRI
YOGESH BHATNAGAR, COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NO.2)
CONTEMPT PETITION CIVIL No. 806 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
CHANDER SINGH S/O DAYARAM SINGH, AGED 58
YE A R S , OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST, VILLAGE
NAGUKHEDI, TEHSIL AND DISTRICT DEWAS (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(SHRI AJAY KUMAR MIMROT, COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER).
AND
1. PRADEEP SONI, COMPETENT AUTHORITY, LAND
ACQUISITION OFFICER [SUB DIVISIONAL
OFFICER (REVENUE)] DEWAS (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. SHRI M.L. PURBIA, PROJECT DIRECTOR,
NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA,
IMPLEMENTATION UNIT, B-21/9 MAHANAND
NAGAR UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI PADMNABH SAXENA, COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NO.1).(SHRI
YOGESH BHATNAGAR, COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NO.2)
CONTEMPT PETITION CIVIL No. 807 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
AMIT S/O SURENDRAKUMAR MAHESHWARI, AGED 48
Y E A R S , OCCUPATION: BUSINESS R/O VILLAGE
NAGUKHEDI DISTT. DEWAS (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(SHRI AJAY KUMAR MIMROT, COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER).
AND
1. PRADEEP SONI, COMPETENT AUTHORITY, LAND
ACQUISITION OFFICER, [SUB DIVISIONAL
OFFICER (REVENUE)] DEWAS (MADHYA
PRADESH)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SREEVIDYA
Signing time: 09-02-
2024 10:34:50
7
2. SHRI M.L. PURBIA, PROJECT DIRECTOR,
NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA,
IMPLEMENTATION UNIT, B-21/9 MAHANANDA
NAGAR, UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI PADMNABH SAXENA, COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NO.1).(SHRI
YOGESH BHATNAGAR, COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NO.2)
This petition coming on for admission this day, Justice Sushrut Arvind
Dharmadhikari passed the following:
ORDER
Heard on the question of admission.
This order shall govern disposal of aforesaid contempt petitions viz.
CONC No. 798/2023, CONC No. 799/2023, CONC No.800/2023, CONC
No.801/2023, CONC No.802/2023, CONC No. 803/2023, CONC
No.804/2023, CONC No.805/2023, CONC No.806/2023 and CONC No.
807/2023.
2. Regard being had to the similitude of the controversy involved in the
aforesaid cases, they have been heard analogously and disposed of by this
common order.
3. For the sake of convenience, facts of CONC No. 798/2023 are taken
up.
4. In this petition under Article 215 of the Constitution of India read
with Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, the wilful disobedience
of the judgment dated 06.12.2021 passed in W.P.No. 18453/2021 and order
dated 28.01.2022 passed in R.P.No. 29/2022 has been alleged by the
petitioners.
5. The brief facts of the case are that, earlier the petitioners had filed
writ petitions challenging the review of the award. The singular legal question
involved in the writ petition was that once an award of compensation is passed,
whether the competent authority can review the award. This Court, relying on
the case of Indrakala Agrawal & Ors. vs. State of M.P. & Ors. reported in
2021(3) MPLJ 509 opined that there is no enabling provision on the strength
of which such review of the award can be said to be permissible. As a result,
the impugned amended award was set aside.
6. While disposing of the bunch of writ petitions vide order dated
06.12.2021, the following order was passed:
''In our opinion the singular question mentioned hereinabove has been decided by
various Division Benches. The curtains are finally drawn at the level of the High
Court. No order of Supreme Court taking contrary view is brought to our notice.
We are bound by the principle laid down in the case of Indrakala Agrawal
(supra) and in W.P.No. 7260/2021 (Suresh Kumar and others vs. Union of India
and others) dated 07.04.2021.
Resultantly all the impugned amended awards assailed in these batch of petitions
are set aside. The petitions are allowed.
The respondents shall take effective steps and expedite the disbursement of
compensation to the claimants.
Signed order be kept in the file of W.P.No. 21556/2021 and a copy thereof be
placed in the file of connected writ petitions.''
7 . Being aggrieved, the National Highway Authority of India (NHAI)
filed Review Petition No.56/2022 and connected review petitions, which were
decided vide order dated 28.01.2022 and the following order was passed:
''We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the
record of the case.
Rule 3 of 'the Rules of 2019' (The National Highways (Manner of Depositing the
Amount by the Central Government; Making Requisite Funds Available to the
Competent Authority For Acquisition of Land) Rules, 2019) provides the
procedure of making requisite funds available to the competent authority. Rule
3(iv) provides that the competent authority shall, in turn, disburse the compensation
amount to the landowners or the persons interest therein preferably by
electronically crediting the said amount into their respective bank accounts. The
provision of the aforesaid Rules also provides the manner of disbursement of the
amount so deposited by the National Highway Authority before the competent
authority for land acquisition.
In view of the above, all the review petitions are disposed of by modifying order
dated 6.12.2021 passed in the bunch of writ petitions filed by the Non-applicants
in the following manner.
The last 4 paragraphs of the impugned order dated 6.12.2021 are hereby replaced
by the following paragraph :-
''We are bound by the principle laid down in the case of Smt. Indrakala
Agrawal (supra) and in W.P.No. 7260/2021 (Suresh Kumar and others vs.
Union of India and others) dated 07.04.2021 as modified in RP No.
408/2021 (National Highways Authority of India vs. Smt.Indrakala
Agrawal and others). The NHAI/ review petitioners shall have the right to
challenge the validity of the original award passed by the LAO in accordance
with the law.
All the impugned amended awards are set aside.
The NHAI shall disburse the amount of compensation u/s 3H of the National
Highways and under provisions of the Rules of 2019 to the claimants''.
A copy of this order placed in the record of all the writ petitions.
Let a copy of this order be placed in all connected review petitions.''
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the orders
impugned have not been complied by the respondents/NHAI. Therefore, they
are liable to be punished for violating the orders of this Court.
9 . Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that in
case this Court finds that the orders have not been complied with, for that the
answering respondents/contemnors have already tendered unconditional
apology with folded hands. Learned counsel further submitted that the order
dated 06.12.2021 passed in the writ petitions had set aside the amended
awards assailed in the batch of writ petitions and the petitions were allowed.
The original award was passed on 01.10.2020 which remained intact.
Thereafter, in review petitions, this Court vide order dated 28.01.2022 set aside
the amendment based on the principles laid down in case of Smt. Indrakala
Agrawal (supra) and at the same time modified the last four paragraphs of the
order dated 06.12.2021 passed in the writ petitions. The answering
respondents/NHAI was granted the liberty to challenge the validity of the
original award passed by the land acquisition officer in accordance with law
with a further direction that the NHAI shall disburse the amount of
compensation under Section 3H of the National Highways Act, 1956
(hereinafter referred to as Act of 1956) and under the provisions of Rules of
2019. Being aggrieved, the NHAI filed application under Section 3G5 of the
Act of 1956 before the Collector Dewas which came to be dismissed on
08.07.2022. The NHAI challenged the order before the District Judge, Dewas
under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Reconciliation Act, 1996 which came to
be rejected on 08.12.2022. Thereafter, the impugned orders dated 06.12.2021
and 28.01.2022 were challenged before the Apex Court by NHAI in SLP Nos.
18889-18948/2022 which also came to be dismissed vide order dated
02.11.2022 with liberty to the NHAI to pursue the remedies before the learned
Arbitrator. Thereafter, on availing the remedy the answering respondent filed
application before the learned Arbitrator/Collector Dewas under Section 23 of
the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Vide judgment dated 11.04.2023, the
Collector, Dewas reduced the compensation as awarded in the main award
dated 01.10.2020. The reduced compensation has already been paid to the
petitioners individually in each case. The details of the payment, etc. has been
brought on record through the compliance report. Being aggrieved, the
petitioners have filed applications under Section 3G5 of the Act of 1956 for
enhancement of compensation. Hence, as such no wilful disobedience can be
attributed to the respondents/contemnors.
10. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Perused the record as well as
the compliance report.
11 . Admittedly, the original award dated 01.10.2020 was not amended
by this Court in the writ petitions. Even in the review petition, only the amended
awards were set aside and the original award remained intact. It is only then that
the respondent/NHAI approached the Collector Dewas under Section 23 of the
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and compensation was reduced and
award was modified. On perusal of the compliance report, it is seen that the
compensation according to the amended award has already been paid to the
respective petitioners in their bank accounts. The respondents in their reply as
well as compliance report have categorically stated about the mode of
payment. In such a situation, it cannot be said that there is wilful disobedience
of the orders passed by this Court by the respondents.
12. In view of the aforesaid, this Court does not find any wilful
disobedience calling this Court to initiate the action for committing contempt of
the Court orders. The answering respondents have already tendered their
unconditional apology. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts and
circumstances, there is no reason for this Court to continue with the contempt
proceedings.
13. Accordingly, the proceedings are dropped against the contemnors.
The contempt petitions are hereby dismissed. Rule nisi stands discharged.
1 4 . Let a copy of this order placed in the record of the connected
contempt petitions.
(S. A. DHARMADHIKARI) (DEVNARAYAN MISHRA)
JUDGE JUDGE
vidya
