Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Pushpakiran Lilhare vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 17 November, 2025
Author: Vishal Mishra
Bench: Vishal Mishra
1 WP-44588-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
WP No. 44588 of 2025
(SMT. PUSHPAKIRAN LILHARE Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS )
Dated : 17-11-2025
Shri Pravesh Naveriya - Advocate for the petitioner.
Issue notice to the respondents on payment of process fee within
seven working days by RAD mode, returnable in four weeks, failing which
this petition shall stand dismissed without further reference to the Court.
Heard on the question of interim relief.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that in
similar circumstances in W.P. No.42570/2025, this Court vide order dated
10/11/2025 has extended interim relief to the petitioner therein. He has
placed reliance upon provisions of the Colony Development Rules, 2021
specifically referring to Rule 22 which deals with Action against the
development of unauthorised colonies wherein Clause 4 is relevant, which
reads as under :-
"(4) In case, the development/construction is not removed in the
unauthorised colony within the period specified in sub-rule (3)
hereinabove, the competent authority shall take action for removal
of the development/construction and also file complaint against
the developer and landowner in the concerned police station for
taking necessary penal action under the relevant provisions of the
Act."
He has further relied upon Section 339-C of the M.P. Municipalities
Act, 1961 and has argued that Clauses 1 and 2 deal with the offences being
carried out while doing illegal colonization, specifically referred to Clause 3
which provides that the Courts are having powers for imposing punishment
and fine. The relevant reads as under :-
2 WP-44588-2025
"(3) Whoever commits or abets the commission of an offence of
illegal diversion or illegal colonization shall be punished with an
imprisonment of not less than three years and not more than seven
years and with a minimum fine of ten thousand rupees, and the
Court may, in passing the judgment in respect of any such offence,
order the accused to pay to the Council, such amount of
compensation as specified in the judgment, taking into
consideration the amount required to be incurred towards the
development of such illegal colony, and such offence shall be a
cognizable offence."
He has referred to impugned order pointing out the fact that such
exercise is being carried out by the respondent No.3/Sub Divisional Officer
(Revenue) who is not a competent authority. It is the Court which can impose
fine upon the petitioner. Therefore, he prays for similar interim relief as
granted in W.P. No.42570/2025
Considering the aforesaid, as a matter of interim relief, the effect and
operation of the impugned orders are stayed till the next date of hearing.
State counsel is at liberty to file response along with the stay vacating
application.
List after four weeks along with Writ Petition No.42570/2025 for
analogous hearing.
Certified copy as per rules.
(VISHAL MISHRA)
JUDGE
Shbhnkr
