Madhya Pradesh High Court
Shankar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 January, 2025
Author: Pranay Verma
Bench: Pranay Verma
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:2015
1 WP-1065-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRANAY VERMA
ON THE 27th OF JANUARY, 2025
WRIT PETITION No. 1065 of 2025
SHANKAR AND OTHERS
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Manu Maheshwari - advocate for the petitioners.
Shri Chetan Joshi appearing on behalf of Advocate General.
ORDER
1. By this petition preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 15/12/2023 (Annexure
P/7) passed by the Naib Tehsildar, Tehsil Malharganj, District Indore
whereby their application under Section 109, 110 of the M.P. Land Revenue
Code, 1959 for being mutated over the disputed lands has been kept in
abeyance and approval of the Collector, District Indore has been sought for.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that title of the
petitioners over the disputed land has been upheld by the Civil Court firstly
before the trial Court, then before the appellate Court, then by this Court in
Second Appeal No.759 of 2007 by judgment dated 23/4/2022 and thereafter
by the Apex Court by order dated 23/1/2023 in Special Leave Petition (C)
No.42683 of 2022. Since title of petitioners has been upheld as aforesaid
they are entitled for being mutated over the disputed land but despite of lapse
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:2015
2 WP-1065-2025
of a period of more than a year their mutation application has been kept
pending and has not been decided.
3. The petitioners title to the disputed land has been upheld upto the
Apex Court. On the basis of the same they are entitled for being mutated
over the disputed land. Even this fact has not been disputed by the Naib
Tehsildar while passing the impugned order. He has also observed that as of
now no proceedings are pending at any stage. However merely for the reason
that in the land records the State of M.P. is recorded over the disputed land,
prior to passing any order, he has sought permission from the Collector,
District Indore.
4. It is well settled that mutation is to be made on the basis of the
decree passed by the Civil Court. The same is the legal duty of the
competent authority which in the present case is the Naib Tehsildar. Under
Section 109, 110 of the Code he has been conferred power of mutation. The
mutation rules provide for mutation and nowhere provide that prior to
passing any order in the proceedings any opinion or approval from higher
revenue authority would be required.
5. Since application for mutation has been preferred before the Naib
Tehsildar he is required to decide the same in accordance with law and only
for the reason that the disputed land is recorded in the name of State
Government in the revenue records there is no necessity or requirement for
him to obtain any permission from any higher revenue authority. The
impugned order passed by the Naib Tehsildar differing decision of the
mutation application and seeking permission from Collector, District Indore
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:2015
3 WP-1065-2025
is illegal.
6 . Thus in view of the aforesaid discussion, it is held that for the
purpose of decision of the mutation application filed by the petitioners no
permission or sanction from any higher revenue authority is required. The
Naib Tehsildar is to decide the application without any such permission /
sanction. The impugned order dated 15/12/2023 is accordingly quashed and
respondent No.4, Naib Tehsildar, Tehsil Malharganj, District Indore is
directed to decide the application for mutation preferred by the petitioners
within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this
order on its own merits by passing a reasoned and a speaking order.
7. With the aforesaid directions, the petition stands disposed off.
(PRANAY VERMA)
JUDGE
SS/-
