Back
2023 Supreme(MP) 598
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH AT GWALIOR
Milind Ramesh Phadke, J.
Laxminarayan Soni – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 2160 of 2023
Decided On : 25-01-2023
Vishal Singh Bhadoria, Advocate, Nitin Goyal, Advocate
The central legal point established is the lack of authority of the Additional Collector to initiate prosecution under Section 339(C) of the M.P. Municipalities Act, 1961.
Headnote:
M.P. Municipalities Act, 1961 - Illegal Colony Development - The court stayed the order directing the registration of an FIR against the petitioner, citing lack of authority of the Additional Collector under Section 339(C) of the Act.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenged an order directing the registration of an FIR against them for developing an illegal colony without due permissions.
Finding of the Court:
The court stayed the effect and operation of the order, noting the lack of authority of the Additional Collector to initiate prosecution under Section 339(C) of the M.P. Municipalities Act, 1961.
Issues: Authority of the Additional Collector to initiate prosecution under Section 339(C) of the M.P. Municipalities Act, 1961.
Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the Additional Collector lacked the authority to initiate prosecution under Section 339(C) of the M.P. Municipalities Act, 1961, and therefore stayed the order directing the registration of an FIR against the petitioner.
Final Decision: The court stayed the effect and operation of the order and issued notice to the respondents for further proceedings.
JUDGMENT
Milind Ramesh Phadke, J. - The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred against the order dated 16.01.2023 whereby the Additional Collector, District Shivpuri exercising the powers under Section 339(C) of Madhya Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1961 has held the petitioner to be developing an illegal colony without due and requisite permissions and has directed the CMO, Nagarpalika, Shipvuri to get FIR registered against the present petitioner, within a period of seven days and intimate the same to the said authority.
2. It has been argued by the counsel for the petitioner that under the provisions of M.P. Municipalities Act, 1961 particularly, under Section 339(C) which is to be read in conjugation with Section 313 of M.P. Municipalities Act, the powers rest with the Council, Chief Municipal Officer or any other Officer authorized in this behalf to initiate any prosecution against such acts as alleged against the petitioner and since the order has been passed by the Additional Collector who has no authority, the order is bad in law.
3. To bolster his submission, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the orders of Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Smt. Rekha Gupta Vs. State of M.P. passed in W.P.No.8326/2012 decided on 18/04/2016 and in the case of Shivcharan Vs. State of M.P. passed in W.P.No.19937/2017 decided on 22/11/2017.
4. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, the effect and operation o f order dated 16.01.2023 passed in Case No.0002/A-74/2022-23 (Annexure P/1) deserves to be stayed and accordingly, shall remain stayed till the next date of hearing.
5. Issue notice to the respondents on payment of process fee within four working days through registered A.D. post as well as ordinary mode, returnable within four weeks.
6. List this case in the week commencing 13th March, 2023.
