IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Anand Pathak, J.
Ramesh Singh v. State of M.P.
Miscellaneous Petition No. 5832 of 2023 (Gwalior);
Decided on 5.10.2023.
Òw&jktLo lafgrk] 1959 ¼e-ç-½ && èkkjk 131 && ekxkZfèkdkj && ;kph u lkoZtfud ekxZ d¢ ç;¨tukFkZ Òwfe çnku djus dh vuqKk dh bZIlk djrs gq, rglhynkj d¢ le{k fd;k && rglhynkj d¢oy Ñf"k ç;¨tu d¢ fy, ekxkZfèkdkj ns ldrk gS && ,sls vuqr¨"k d¢ fy, tSlk ;kph pkgrk gS] èkkjk 131 d¢ vèkhu mipkj miyC/k ugÈA ¼iSjk 5 ,oa 6
Land Revenue Code, 1959 (M. P.) -- S. 131 -- right of way -- petitioner filed application before Tahsildar seeking permission for grant of land for purpose of public way -- Tahsildar can give right of way only for agriculture purpose -- for such relief as petitioner wants, remedy under section 131 is not available. [Paras 5 & 6
ORDER
1. The present petition is preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution by the petitioner being aggrieved by order dated 21.09.2023 whereby appeal preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed.
2. It is the submission of counsel for the petitioner that earlier petitioner filed an application before the Tehsildar seeking permission for grant of land for the purpose of public way and called the report. On the basis of said report, permission was granted to the petitioner. Against the order of Tehsildar, respondent No.1 filed an appeal before the SDO, which got dismissed. Thereafter, petitioner filed civil suit wherein interim order has been granted in favour of petitioner which is still in existence, but respondent No.1 filed second appeal before the Commissioner, Gwalior which was allowed without considering the grounds raised by the petitioner and ignored written statement of petitioner.Therefore, petitioner is before this Court and prayed for settingaside the order dated 21.9.2023.
3. Learned counsel for the respondent opposed the prayer and supported the impugned order.
4. Heard the counsel for the parties and perused the documents appended thereto.
5. In the present case, petitioner is taking exception to the order dated 21.9.2023 passed by Additional Commissioner Gwalior. The said authority has rightly concluded that as per section 131 of Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code 1959 (hereinafter referred as "Code 1959"), Tehsildar can give right of way only for agriculture purpose. Here, allegation against the petitioner is that he is selling residential plots over the land under his ownership and therefore, he is seeking right of way over government land.
6. For said purpose, no direction can be given. Additional Commissioner rightly came to the conclusion in this regard. Even otherwise, in given facts and circumstances of the case remedy under section 131 of the Code 1959 is not available to the petitioner. If advised so, petitioner may avail other remedy, if any, available to him under the Code 1959.
7. With the aforesaid, petition is dismissed accordingly.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Tahsildar's decision under Section 143 of the MLR Code should be based on the needs of the petitioners for reasonable access to their fiel....
Civil Courts possess jurisdiction to adjudicate easementary rights despite revenue authority's orders, provided disputes are not in respect of Government land.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the need for providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and the unsustainable nature of the impugned orders due to the lack of oppor....
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.