JUDGMENT

Dr. Mukundakam Sharma, J. —

1. Leave granted.

2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 29.08.2008 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur, in Writ Appeal No. 1063 of 2003, whereby the High Court dismissed the said appeal filed by the appellant herein and upheld the order dated 16.04.2003 passed by the Single Bench of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur.

3. The appellant is Bhuswami of certain lands situated at Tehsil Khandwa, District East Nimar, Madhya Pradesh. A draft development plan was published under the Madhya Pradesh Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973 (hereafter referred to as “The Act”). The appellant came to know that the draft development plan included some portion of her land with the intention of making it available for Navchandi Mela. However, the land was ancestral and the appellant intended to transfer it by a will duly registered and already executed.

4. The Appellant submitted objections on 24.03.2000 and a committee was constituted consisting of Member of Parliament, Member of Legislative Assembly, Mayor, President Zila Panchayat, Sarpanch Gram Panchayat and Collector. The committee considered the objections and decided that the land was not required and the objections of the appellant and others were accepted stating that the land in question was not required. Accordingly, a resolution dated 26.05.2000 was passed by the committee in favour of the Appellant.

5. In spite of the resolution passed by the committee, by a notification dated 28.02.2001 published in Madhya Pradesh Raj Patra, the Appellant came to know that the State Government had included certain lands belonging to the appellant in the modified development plan. The Appellant filed review Petition under section 23(A) of the Act before the State Government which was rejected by order dated 24.07.2002 stating that there is no provision for review of the order in the Act.

6. The Appellant thereafter, filed Writ Petition in the High Court which was dismissed by the Learned Single Judge by order dated 16.04.2003. Since the Letter Patent jurisdiction was abolished, the appellant filed Special Leave Petition in the Supreme Court. During the pendency of the Special Leave Petition the provision of Letter Patent jurisdiction was revived. The Special Leave Petition was allowed to be withdrawn for filing Letters Patent Appeal in the High Court.

7. The Appellant filed Writ Appeal before the High Court of Judicature, Jabalpur which was dismissed by order dated 29.08.08. The present appeal, as stated hereinbefore, is directed against the aforesaid order passed by the High Court.

8. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that after passing of the Resolution by the Committee constituted accepting the objections/suggestions of the appellant, the said resolution of the Committee should have been accepted by the Government as the same was binding, but instead the State Government without providing any opportunity of hearing to the appellant rejected the said recommendation of the committee and proceeded to acquire the land without giving any opportunity of hearing and thus the said action of the State Government is in violation of the principles of natural justice.

9. It was also submitted that the entire acquisition process was in colourable exercise of power and not for any public purpose and that it was done for extraneous consideration. It was also submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant that the appellant had all along been assured that the land belonging to her will not be used for or utilised by the State Government for the purpose of holding a Mela and therefore, the acquisition of the said land came as a complete surprise to the appellant.

10. It was also submitted that as per the report of the Committee constituted of Member of Parliament, Members of Legislative Assembly, Mayor, President of Zila Panchayat, Sarpanch Gram Panchayat and Collector, the land