Madhya Pradesh High Court
Pranay Shukla vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 7 February, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:6113
1 WP-5048-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK JAIN
ON THE 7 th OF FEBRUARY, 2025
WRIT PETITION No. 5048 of 2025
PRANAY SHUKLA
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Vishal V.R. Daniel - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri B.D. Singh - Deputy Advocate General with Shri Anubhav Jain - Government
Advocate for the respondent - State.
ORDER
The present petition has been filed challenging the notice Annexure P-
2 dated 06.02.2025 issued under Section 248 MPLRC by the Tehsildar
(Nazul), Tehsil & Distt. Damoh (MP), alleging that the father of petitioner
namely Praveen Kumar Shukla has encroached upon Government land in
plot No.153/1 area 5000 sq.ft. Another notice Annexure P-4 dated
06.02.2025 is also under challenge, which has been issued by the Municipal
Council, Damoh calling upon the father of petitioner in terms of Section
187(1)(a) to pull down the building within three days or it will be pulled
down by force by the Municipal authority. The said period is stated to be
getting over on 09.02.2025.
2. The case of the petitioner is that the father of petitioner was granted
a patta/lease on the land by the State Government vide Annexure P-1 dated
31.08.2003 and under authority of the said patta they are in occupation. The
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:6113
2 WP-5048-2025
case of the petitioner further is that the patta is in favour of his father and
mother (now deceased). The father of the petitioner has been taken in
custody for an offence registered at Crime No.100/2025, Police Station-
Damoh Kotwali, District Damoh (MP) under Sections 143(3), 143(4), 3(5)
BNS, Sections 3/5 M.P. Freedom of Religion Act, 2021, Sections 42 and 75
of Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 and provisions of SC, ST (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act.
3. The case of the petitioner is that the father of petitioner is in custody
in connection with the said offence and now the notices have been issued,
which have been received by the petitioner being his son and the documents
relating to the permission and other documents cannot be collected by the
petitioner at such a short notice, because they are in possession of his father,
who is in custody. It is further the case of the petitioner that the building in
question has been sealed and locked by State authorities in connection with
the said offence registered against his father and therefore, he is not having
excess of many of such documents and collection of such documents in view
of prevailing situation will take atleast ten days time.
4. So far as the notice Annexure P-4 issued by the Municipal Council,
Damoh is concerned, it is contended that by this notice not even any
opportunity has been given to the petitioner to submit any reply and
straightaway a conclusion has been drawn that the building is constructed
without permission and notice of demolition under Section 187(8)(a) of the
Municipality Act has been given to pull down the structure within three days.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:6113
3 WP-5048-2025
5. Per contra, it is contended by learned Deputy Advocate General for
the State that various dubious activities were taking place in the building in
question on account of which the FIR was lodged, however, the proposed
action against the building is not connected with the said FIR. It has been
detected by the authorities that the building is constructed on Government
land and without permission of Municipal authority and therefore, two
separate parallel notices have been issued, one by revenue authorities and
another by Municipal authorities.
6. Upon hearing learned counsel for rival parties, when this Court
confronted the counsel for the petitioner that so far as the notice Annexure P-
2 issued for eviction under section 148 MPLRC is concerned, it is a notice
forming no conclusion and he can very well appear before the authority and
file reply and thereafter can challenge the final order to be passed by the
authority, it is fairly conceded that the petitioner can certainly do so, but for
that he should have some reasonable opportunity to appear, file documents
and satisfy the authority about the legality of his possession.
7. The Supreme Court in the case of In Re : Directions in the matter
of demolition of structures reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3291 has held
as under:-
"91. At the outset, we clarify that these directions will not be
applicable if there is an unauthorized structure in any public
place such as road, street, footpath, abutting railway line or any
river body or water bodies and also to cases where there is an
order for demolition made by a Court of law.
A. NOTICE
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:6113
4 WP-5048-2025
i. No demolition should be carried out without a prior show
cause notice returnable either in accordance with the time
provided by the local municipal laws or within 15 days' time
from the date of service of such notice, whichever is later.
ii. The notice shall be served upon the owner/occupier by a
registered post A.D. Additionally, the notice shall also be
affixed conspicuously on the outer portion of the structure in
question.
iii. The time of 15 days, stated herein above, shall start from the
date of receipt of the said notice.
iv. To prevent any allegation of backdating, we direct that as
soon as the show cause notice is duly served, intimation thereof
shall be sent to the office of Collector/District Magistrate of the
district digitally by email and an auto generated reply
acknowledging receipt of the mail should also be issued from
the office of the Collector/District Magistrate. The
Collector/DM shall designate a nodal officer and also assign an
email address and communicate the same to all the municipal
and other authorities in charge of building regulations and
demolition within one month from today.
v. The notice shall contain the details regarding:
a. the nature of the unauthorized construction.
b. the details of the specific violation and the grounds of
demolition.
c. a list of documents that the noticee is required to
furnish along with his reply.
d. The notice should also specify the date on which the
personal hearing is fixed and the designated authority
before whom the hearing will take place;
vi. Every municipal/local authority shall assign a designated
digital portal, within 3 months from today wherein details
regarding service/pasting of the notice, the reply, the show
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:6113
5 WP-5048-2025
cause notice and the order passed thereon would be available.
B. PERSONAL HEARING
i. The designated authority shall give an opportunity of personal
hearing to the person concerned.
ii. The minutes of such a hearing shall also be recorded.
C. FINAL ORDER
i. Upon hearing, the designated authority shall pass a final order.
ii. The final order shall contain:
a. the contentions of the noticee, and if the designated
authority disagrees with the same, the reasons thereof;
b. as to whether the unauthorized construction is
compoundable, if it is not so, the reasons therefor;
c. if the designated authority finds that only part of the
construction is unauthorized/noncompoundable, then the
details thereof.
d. as to why the extreme step of demolition is the only
option available and other options like compounding and
demolishing only part of the property are not available.
D. AN OPPORTUNITY OF APPELLATE AND JUDICIAL
SCRUTINY OF THE FINAL ORDER.
i. We further direct that if the statute provides for an appellate
opportunity and time for filing the same, or even if it does not
so, the order will not be implemented for a period of 15 days
from the date of receipt thereof. The order shall also be
displayed on the digital portal as stated above.
ii. An opportunity should be given to the owner/occupier to
remove the unauthorized construction or demolish the same
within a period of 15 days. Only after the period of 15 days
from the date of receipt of the notice has expired and the
owner/occupier has not removed/demolished the unauthorized
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:6113
6 WP-5048-2025
construction, and if the same is not stayed by any appellate
authority or a court, the concerned authority shall take steps to
demolish the same. It is only such construction which is found
to be unauthorized and not compoundable shall be demolished.
iii. Before demolition, a detailed inspection report shall be
prepared by the concerned authority signed by two Panchas.
E. PROCEEDINGS OF DEMOLITION
i. The proceedings of demolition shall be video-graphed, and the
concerned authority shall prepare a demolition report giving the
list of police officials and civil personnel that participated in the
demolition process. Video recording to be duly preserved.
ii. The said demolition report should be forwarded to the
Municipal Commissioner by email and shall also be displayed
on the digital portal."
8. In view of the above, so far as the notice Annexure P-2 is
concerned, the petitioner is set at liberty to submit reply to the said notice,
latest upto 21.02.2025 before the Tahsildar and appear before the Tehsildar
in person or through counsel on 21.2.2025 at 11.00 AM. The petitioner shall
also indicate his email address and whatsapp number in the said reply. The
Tahsildar thereafter, after hearing the petitioner, shall pass a final order by
following the procedure in terms with the aforesaid judgment of the Supreme
Court and the final order so passed shall in addition to being available for
obtaining certified copy and being uploaded on the digital portal of Revenue
Court (if such portal is available), be sent on the email address and whatsapp
number of the petitioner so mentioned in the reply. If any adverse decision is
taken, the petitioner shall be given an opportunity to file appeal under
provisions of MPLRC relating to appeal. For that purpose, though the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:6113
7 WP-5048-2025
limitation period is 45 days, but if the appeal with stay application is filed
within seven days of such intimation, then adverse action shall not be taken
till the appellate authority deals with the application of the petitioner for
stay/interim relief. Thereafter, the matter will be proceeded in terms of the
orders of the appellate authority.
9. So far as the notice Annexure P-4 issued by the Municipal Council
is concerned, the Municipal Council has already arrived at a conclusion that
the father of petitioner has constructed building without permission. It seems
reasonable to permit the petitioner to collect documents and submit a reply
before the Municipal Council and be given an opportunity to satisfy the
competent authority of the Municipal Council regarding validity of his
construction. For this purpose, the petitioner may file a representation before
the Chief Municipal Officer of the Municipality on or before 21.02.2025 and
will appear in person on 21.2.2025 at 3.30 pm. The Municipal Council shall
thereafter take note of the reply of the petitioner and examine it in
accordance with the provisions of the M.P. Municipalities Act 1961 and the
rules and construction bye-laws framed thereunder and then take a decision
whether to demolish the structure or not and whether the structure is valid or
not as per the provisions of the said act and building bylaws. Till that time,
the notice Annexure P-4 shall remain in abeyance.
1 0 . It is made clear that if the Municipal Council still decides to
proceed ahead in the matter, then the intimation thereof with copy of
order/notice shall be given to the petitioner on his email address and
whatsapp number in addition to it being uploaded on digital portal of the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:6113
8 WP-5048-2025
Municipality (if such portal is available). The petitioner would be at liberty to
file an appeal against the notice Annexure P-4 or against the said intimation
given by the Chief Municipal Officer after considering the reply and
documents so submitted by the petitioner.
11. If any adverse decision is taken, the petitioner shall be given an
opportunity to file appeal under Section 307 (1) (b) of the M.P.
Municipalities Act 1961. For that purpose, though the limitation period is 30
days, but if the appeal with stay application is filed within seven days of such
intimation sent by email/whatsapp, then adverse action shall not be taken till
the appellate authority deals with the application of the petitioner for
stay/interim relief. Thereafter, the matter will be proceeded in terms of the
orders of the appellate authority.
12. In the above terms, the petition is disposed of.
(VIVEK JAIN)
JUDGE
rj
