IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Subodh Abhyankar, J.
Phool Singh v. State of M.P. and others
Writ Petition No. 8376 of 2022 (Indore); Decided on 27.10.2022
Òw&jktLo lafgrk] 1959 ¼eŒçŒ½ & èkkjk 131 & rglhynkj d¢ le{k vkosnu yafcr & mPp U;k;ky; dk vkns'k fd i{kdkj ;FkkfLFkfr cuk, j[ksa & çÒko & ;FkkfLFkfr d¢ vkns'k d¢ dkj.k vkosnu fofuf'pr ugha fd;k tk ldk & vkosnu fofuf'pr djus d¢ fy, rglhynkj funsf'kr & vkosnu d¢ fofu'p;u rd ;FkkfLFkfr cuk, j[kus d¢ fy, i{kdkj funsf'krA ¼iSjk 4½
Land Revenue Code, 1959 (M.P.) -- S. 131 -- application pending before Tahsildar -- order of High Court that status quo to be maintained by parties -- effect -- application could not be decided due to order of status quo -- Tahsildar directed to decide application -- parties directed to maintain status quo till decision of application. [Para 4]
ORDER
Heard.
1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs, which are mentioned herein as verbatim:-
"(i) That, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to allow the present petition be allowed with costs; and
(ii) The impugned order Annexure P/1 dated 5.1.2022 passed by the Additional Collector, Dhar be set aside/quashed by issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari/mandamus or by any other appropriate writ, order or direction in exercise of writ jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court; and
(iii) Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the present case, be granted to the petitioner."
2. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that by way of interim measure this Court vide its order dated 26.4.2022 has already passed an order of status quo to be maintained by the parties. It is submitted that after the aforesaid order was passed, the Tahsildar before whom the original proceedings is still pending has not proceeded ahead only because of the status quo order passed by this Court. Thus, it is submitted that the Naib Tahsildar Badnawar, District Dhar be directed to complete the proceedings under section 131 of M.P. Land Revenue Code, 1959 and the parties may be directed to maintain status quo as has already been directed by this Court vide order dated 26.04.2022.
2. Counsel for the respondent No.2 has opposed the prayer and it is submitted that no interference is called for against the impugned order.
4. On due consideration of submissions and considering the dispute between the parties, which is still pending before the Tahsildar, this Court is inclined to disposed of this petition with a direction to the Tahsildar Badnawar before whom the application under section 131 of M.P. Land Revenue Code is pending to decide the same within 45 days in accordance with law. Till the aforesaid application is decided by the Tehsildar, the parties shall maintain status quo as directed by this Court vide order dated 26.4.2022.
5. It is made clear that this Court has not reflected anything on the merits of the case.
With the aforesaid, writ petition stands disposed of.
SupremeToday
The main legal point established is that a petition under Article 226 may not be maintainable if the statutory remedy available under the relevant law has not been exhausted.
Point of law: Protection of possession - specific instances given in writing in the memo of appeal to point out that in few cases, enormous delay is condoned by the very authority, but the same has n....
Section 133 Cr.P.C. inapplicable to patta landowners recognized by superior revenue authorities without preliminary order.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.