Mayank Prajapati vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2026 Latest Caselaw 3215 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Mayank Prajapati vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 2 April, 2026

                                                             1                               WP-10745-2026
                            IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                  AT JABALPUR
                                                       BEFORE
                                        HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT
                                                  ON THE 2 nd OF APRIL, 2026
                                               WRIT PETITION No. 10745 of 2026
                                               MAYANK PRAJAPATI
                                                     Versus
                                    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
                          Appearance:
                                 Shri Mayank Prajapati - Advocate for the petitioner.

                                 Shri Darshan Soni - Government Advocate for the respondent/State.

                                                                 ORDER

The petitioner has prayed for following reliefs in this petition :

"a. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the Respondent No.1 and Respondent No.2 to take immediate and effective action on the petitioner's complaint dated 05.01 2026 (Annexure P/1) in accordance with law in a time bound manner.

b. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction directing the Respondent No.1 and Respondent No.2 to take action on the basis of the inquiry Report dated 09.07.2020 (Annexure P/2) submitted by Respondent No.3 (Deputy Inspector General of Registration, Jabalpur Division), and to initiate departmental disciplinary proceedings against Respondent No.4, within a fixed time frame as may be deemed fit by this Hon'ble Court.

c. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction directing the Respondent authorities to initiate appropriate criminal proceedings/investigation against Respondent No.4 and other concerned officials/persons for offences relating to manipulation/forgery of government records, abuse of official position, illegal registration, and deliberate evasion of stamp duty, as revealed in the

2 WP-10745-2026 inquiry report dated 09.07.2020.

d. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction directing the Respondent No.1 and Respondent No.2 to ensure that Respondent No.4 is not continued or posted on any sensitive post involving revenue collection, Stamp duty assessment, registration powers or quasi-judicial functions, during pendency of departmental/criminal proceedings, in the interest of justice. e. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction directing the Respondent authorities to assess and recover the loss caused to the State Government on account of evasion of stamp duty and registration fee in relation to Sale Deed No. MP182542019A1837317 dated 12.12.2019 (Annexure P/4) and to fix responsibility upon the erring officers in accordance with law.

f. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction directing the Réspondents to file an Action Taken Report before this Hon'ble Court within a stipulated period regarding compliance of the inquiry report dated 09.07.2020 (Annexure P/2) and the petitioner's complaint dated 05.01.2026 (Annexure P/1). g. Pass any other order(s) or direction(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

h. Award cost of this petition in favour of the petitioner."

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

3. Considering the submissions made at the Bar, it is appropriate to direct the respondent No.1 to decide the pending application (Annexure P/1) of the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six weeks form the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today by considering the material available on record and also in accordance with law without influencing by the order passed by this Court. The outcome of the same shall be communicated to the petitioner within a period of two weeks therefrom.

4. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.

3 WP-10745-2026

5. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the contentions raised in the present petition.

(SANDEEP N. BHATT) JUDGE

b