SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(MP) 213

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Anand Pathak, J.
Hussain Khan v. State of M. P. & Others
Writ Petition No. 1504 of 2024 (Gwalior): against the order dated 27.12.2017 passed by the Collector, District Ashok Nagar in Case No. 24/Suo Motu Revision/2014-15;
Decided on 12.3.2024.

Advocates:
Akram Khan for petitioner; Vivek Khedkar, Additional Advocate General for respondents/State.

Headnote:

Òw&jktLo lafgrk] 1959 ¼e-ç-½ && èkkjk 8 && Òkjr dk lafoèkku && vuq- 226 && dysDVj }kjk Loçsj.kk ls iqujh{k.k esa ikfjr vkns'k && ,sls vkns'k d¢ fo#) mipkj && mipkj lafgrk dh èkkjk 8 d¢ vèkhu jktLo eaMy d¢ le{k gS] fjV ;kfpdk ugha && ;kph dks jktLo eaMy tkus dk funs'kA fjV ;kfpdk Ø- 9974 lu~ 2018 fu.kÊr fnukad 19-6-2020- fufnZ"VA ¼iSjk 4

Land Revenue Code, 1959 (M. P.) -- S. 8 -- Constitution of India -- Art. 226 -- order passed by Collector in suo motu revision -- remedy against such order -- remedy is under section 8 of Code before Board of Revenue and not by way of writ petition -- petitioner directed to approach Board of Revenue. W. P. No. 9974 of 2018 decided on 19.6.2020 referred to. [Para 4

ORDER

1. The present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution has been preferred by the petitioner seeking following reliefs:

"(i) The impugned order dated 27.12.2017 (Annexure P/1) passed by the respondent No.2 in case No.24/Suomoto revision/2014-15 may kindly be set aside in the interest of justice.

Any other relief that this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be granted to the petitioner."

2. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submitted that against the order dated 27.12.2017 passed by the Collector District Ashoknagar, petitioner has remedy under Section 8 of the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959. He referred order dated 19.06.2020 passed in Writ Petition No.9974/2018 (Brijmohan v. Board of Revenue) to submit that against such order revisional/supervisory powers under section 8 of the Code, 1959 are available to Board of Revenue.

3. Learned Additional Advocate General for the respondents/State opposed the prayer on the ground of question of limitation involved in the case. According to him, this petition has been filed after the delay of more than 6 years.

4. Considering the above submissions, this petition is disposed of with the direction to the petitioner approach the Madhya Pradesh Revenue Board purportedly under section 8 of the Code, 1959 in accordance with law accompanying application for condonation of delay narrating all the reasons for causing delay which shall be considered by the Revenue Board in accordance with law and ensure passing of appropriate order.

5. With the aforesaid, the present petition stands disposed of.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top