Back
2025 Supreme(MP) 39
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Pranay Verma, J.
Dhannalal & Others v. State of M. P. & Others
Writ Petition No. 36475 of 2024 (Indore);
Decided on 6.1.2025.
Arjun Pathak for petitioners; Sunil Kumar Jain with Ms. Nandini Sharma for respondent No. 6; Bhuwan Deshmukh, Government Advocate for respondents No. 1 to 4/State.
Headnote:
¼1½ Òw&jktLo lafgrk] 1959 ¼e-ç-½ && èkkjk 135 && dkWy¨ukbtj us viuh dkWy¨uh igq¡pus d¢ fy, lM+d cukus dh vuqefr gsrq vkosnu fd;k && ;kphx.k d¨ lwpuk rFkk lquokà dk volj çnku fd, fcuk] ljdkjh vkSj ;kph ÒwfeLokfe;¨a dh Òwfe ij lM+d cukus dh vuqefr çnku dh xbZ && dkWy¨ukbtj us ;kphx.k d¨ lhekadu d¢ le; mifLFkr jgus dk lwpuki= tkjh fd;k && rglhynkj }kjk lalwpuk çdkf'kr dh xbZ && ek= lalwpuk dk çdk'ku i;kZIr ugÈ && ;kphx.k d¨ O;fäxr lwpuki= tkjh fd;k tkuk vkKkid gS && laiw.kZ dk;Zokgh uSlfxZd U;k; d¢ fl)kar dk Ĩj vfrØe.k gS && vk{ksfir lalwpuk vfÒ[kafMr && dysDVj dk vkns'k fnukad 1-8-2024 ;kphx.k ij vkc)dj ugha && uohu dk;Zokgh dh Lora=rk çnku dh xÃA ¼iSjk 7 ,oa 11
¼2½ uSlfxZd U;k; && dkWy¨ukbtj us viuh dkWy¨uh igq¡pus d¢ fy, lM+d cukus dh vuqefr gsrq vkosnu fd;k && ;kphx.k d¨ lwpuk rFkk lquokà dk volj çnku fd, fcuk] ljdkjh ljdkjh vkSj ;kph ÒwfeLokfe;¨a dh Òwfe ij lM+d cukus dh vuqefr çnku dh xbZ && ;kphx.k d¨ O;fäxr lwpuki= tkjh fd;k tkuk vkKkid gS && laiw.kZ dk;Zokgh uSlfxZd U;k; d¢ fl)kar dk Ĩj vfrØe.k gS && vfÒ[kafMrA¼iSjk 7 ,oa 11
¼3½ Òw&jktLo lafgrk] 1959 ¼e-ç-½ && èkkjk 114 rFkk 115 && jktLo vfÒys[k esa ;kphx.k ÒwfeLokeh d¢ :i esa vfÒfyf[kr && ;kphx.k dh lgÒkfxrk d¢ fcuk] mudh lgefr ds fcuk rFkk ihB&ihNs] jktLo vfÒys[k ifjofrZr fd;k x;k && dk;Zokgh rFkk vkns'k vfÒ[kafMrA ¼iSjk 8] 9 ,oa 11
¼4½ Òw&jktLo lafgrk] 1959 ¼e-ç-½ && èkkjk 237¼1½ && ykxw g¨uk && èkkjk esa mfYyf[kr ç;¨tu¨a d¢ fy, n[kyjfgr Òwfe d¨ gh i`Fkd~ j[kk tk ld¢xk && ;kphx.k Òwfe d¢ ÒwfeLokeh gSa rFkk Òwfe n[kyjfgr ugÈ && ;fn fdlh ;¨tuk d¢ fy, ;kphx.k dh fdlh Òwfe dh vko';drk gS rks vtZu ls iwoZ mUgsa lwpuki= tkjh fd;k tkuk visf{kr gS && ,slk ugÈ fd;k x;k rFkk mudh Òwfe ij lM+d fuekZ.k dh vuqefr çnku dh xà && vuqe¨nu ugÈ fd;k tk ldrkA ¼iSjk 10
(1) Land Revenue Code, 1959 (M. P.) -- S. 135 -- colonizer applied for permission to construct road to approach his colony -- without notice and without providing hearing opportunity to petioners, permission for construction of road granted over Government land and petitioner Bhumiswamis -- notice issued to Bhumiswamis by colonizer to remain present at time of demarcation -- communication published by Tahsildar -- mere publication of communication not sufficient -- issuance of individual notice to petitioners is mandatory -- entire proceedings are gross violation of principles of natural justice -- impugned communication quashed -- order dated 1.8.2024 of Collector not binding upon petitioners -- liberty granted for fresh proceedings. [Paras 7 & 11
(2) Natural Justice -- colonizer applied for permission to construct road to approach his colony -- without notice and without providing hearing opportunity to petioners, permission for construction of road granted over Government land and petitioner Bhumiswamis -- issuance of individual notice to petitioners is mandatory -- entire proceedings are gross violation of principles of natural justice -- quashed. [Paras 7 & 11
(3) Land Revenue Code, 1959 (M. P.) -- Ss. 114 and 115 -- petitioners recorded as Bhumiswami in revenue record -- without participation of petitioners, without their consent and behind their back, revenue record altered by unilateral order -- proceedings and order quashed. [Paras 8, 9 & 11
(4) Land Revenue Code, 1959 (M. P.) -- S. 237(1) -- applicability -- only unoccupied land can be set apart for purposes mentioned therein -- petitioners are Bhumiswamis of land and land not unoccupied -- if any land of petitioners is required for any scheme, then prior to acquiring, notice is required to be issued to them -- same not done and permission granted for construction of road over their lands -- cannot be countenanced. [Para 10
ORDER
1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the petitioners, being aggrieved by the notice dated 12.11.2024 (Annexure P/1) issued by respondent No.5, the Revenue Inspector, Circle-03, Tehsil Sanwer, District Indore intimating them to be present at the spot at the time of fixing the boundary marks for broadening of the Government road going through survey No.354/3/2, 354/2/2 area 0.203 hectare.
2. As per the petitioners, petitioner No.1, Dhannalal and Bhagirath, father of petitioners No.2 to 4 were allotted patta on 30.12.2002 of survey No.354/2, Village Muradpura, Tehsil Sanwer, District Indore measuring 1.000 hectare under the provisions of M.P. Land Revenue Code, 1959 in Bhumiswami rights. They were in possession of the land ever since then. Upon death of Bhagirath, petitioners No.2 to 4 have been in possession. By the impugned notice dated 12.11.2024, the petitioners have been intimated by respondent No.5 that respondent No.6 has been granted permission to build a 9 metre wide and 218.72 metre long road to their township passing through land bearing survey No.354/3/2, 354/2/2 and that they should remain present on 15.11.2024 for the purpose of fixing of the boundary marks.
3. As per the petitioners, in the garb of the proceedings, their crops are being destroyed by the respondents and their land is being encroached upon. The permission to build the road was granted by the Additional Collector, District Indore, respondent No.2 by order dated 18.10.2024. However, the petitioners were never served any notice of the proceedings. They have not even been provided copy of the order. By way of the impugned proceedings, the respondents are interfering with their peaceful possession over their land in an illegal manner and in violation of their fundamental rights. The impugned communication hence deserves to be quashed.
4. Reply has been filed by respondents No.1 to 5/State as well as by respondent No.6. The submission of the learned counsel for the respondents is that respondent No.6 is a licensed colonizer. It is the owner of certain lands total measuring 4.027 hectare. It is developing a colony named "Gurukripa Phase-I" in Gram Muradpura, Tehsil Sanwer, District Indore. It moved an application before the Sub Divisional Officer, Sanwer stating that it is required to connect the colony through Government land bearing survey No.354/2 and 354/3 and wants to construct the same permanently. Permission was sought to construct a 30 feet wide and 90 feet long road over the aforesaid land. On the said application, the Sub Divisional Officer directed the Tehsildar to enquire into the matter and to submit a report. The Tehsildar submitted his report on 27.06.2024 which recommended construction of the road. The S.D.O. then by order dated 27.6.2024 directed the Halka Patwari to submit a report. In compliance thereof the report was submitted.
5. Thereafter, by order dated 3.7.2024 the S.D.O. stated that due to construction of road there would be reduction in area of land of survey No.354/2 belonging to the petitioners hence compensation would be provided to them from government land of survey No.354/3. It was stated that approximately 0.068 hectare of land from petitioners' survey No.354/2 would be used for road construction for which equivalent land would be allotted. In accordance with the order passed by the S.D.O., the Collector by order dated 1.8.2024 permitted change of user of the land being used for construction of road along with other land. Based on the order of the Collector, the Additional Collector by order dated 18.10.2024 granted permission to respondent No.6 to construct a road for its colony. Thereafter, the revenue records were corrected accordingly allocating an equivalent area out of Government land survey No.353/3 for compensating the area of petitioners' survey No.354/2 being used for construction of the road. It is in pursuance to the said proceedings that the impugned communicat
