Back
2016 Supreme(MP) 308
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
P. K. Jaiswal and Alok Verma, JJ.
Shantilal Verma v. State of M.P. and others
Writ Petition No.6775 of 2011 (PIL) with Writ Petition
No.10428 of 2011 (Indore); Decided on 13.5.2016.
G. K. Patidar for petitioner; Sunil Jain, Additional Advocate General with Pushyamitra Bhargava, Deputy Advocate General for respondents No.1 to 4; S. C. Bagadiya with S. C. Agrawal for respondents No.6, 7 and 8; Shyam Patidar for respondents No.9 to 13; Brajesh Garg for respondent No.14 and Vishal Lashkari for respondent No.16
Headnote: ¼1½ Hkw&jktLo lafgrk] 1959 ¼e-iz-½ & /kkjk 158¼1½¼[k½ & e-Hkk- Hkw&vkxe rFkk Ñ"kdkf/kdkj fo/kku] 1950 & /kkjk 54¼lkr½ rFkk 101¼1½ & iDdk Ñ"kd ,oa HkwfeLokeh vf/kdkj & dc izksn~Hkwr ugha gks ldrs & ljdkjh Hkwfe & Ñf"k fHkUu iz;kstuksa ds fy, vkcafVr & ,slh Hkwfe ij iDdk Ñ"kd ,oa HkwfeLokeh ds vf/kdkj izksn~Hkwr ugha gksrsA
¼iSjk 18
¼2½ Hkw&vkxe rFkk Ñ"kdkf/kdkj fo/kku] 1950 ¼e-Hkk-½ & /kkjk 54¼7½ rFkk 101¼1½ & e-iz- Hkw&jktLo lafgrk] 1959 & /kkjk 158¼1½¼[k½ & iDdk Ñ"kd ,oa HkwfeLokeh ds vf/kdkj & dc izksn~Hkwr ugha gks ldrs & ljdkjh Hkwfe & Ñf"k fHkUu iz;kstuksa ds fy, vkcafVr & ,slh Hkwfe ij iDdk Ñ"kd ,oa HkwfeLokeh ds vf/kdkj izksn~Hkwr ugha gksrsA ¼iSjk 18
¼3½ Hkkjr dk lafo/kku & vuq&226 & 'kfDr;ksa dh O;kfIr & yksdfgr eqdnek ds :i esa fjV ;kfpdk & ljdkjh Hkwfe & HkwriwoZ Xokfy;j fj;klr }kjk Ñf"k fHkUu iz;kstuksa ds fy, vkcafVr & iês dh 'krks± dk Hkax & HkwfeLokeh vf/kdkj esa ukekarj.k & rRi'pkr~ jftLVªhÑr foØ; foys[k }kjk varj.k ,oa vkoklh; rFkk okf.kfT;d iz;kstuksa ds fy, ifjofrZr & yksdfgr eqd~nek esa jftLVªhÑr foØ; foys[k vikLr ugha fd;k tk ldrk & fdarq ljdkjh Hkwfe dk iêk Ñf"k fHkUu iz;kstuksa ds fy, iznku fd;k x;k & ogh izkbosV i{kdkj dks vkoklh; iz;kstuksa ds fy, varfjr ugha fd;k tk ldrk & jktLo izkf/kdkfj;ksa us lqLFkkfir fofèk ds izfrdwy & varj.k vkSj ukekarj.k vuqKkr fd;k & mPp U;k;ky; dks fuf'pr :i ls yksdfgr eqd~nek esa ,sls iz'u dk ijh{k.k djus dh 'kfDr gSA ¼iSjk 19
¼4½ Hkw&vkxe rFkk Ñ"kdkf/kdkj fo/kku] 1950 ¼e-Hkk-½ & /kkjk 101¼1½ & ljdkjh Hkwfe & HkwriwoZ Xokfy;j fj;klr }kjk Ñf"k fHkUu iz;kstuksa ds fy, vkcafVr & iêk ds fuca/ku rFkk 'krks± ds mYya?ku esa & Hkwfe HkwfeLokeh vf/kdkj esa ukekarfjr & rRi'pkr~ varfjr ,oa vkoklh; rFkk okf.kfT;d iz;kstuksa ds fy, ifjofrZr & iêk jí djus ds fy, dk;Zokgh vkjaHk djus ds fy, ;g i;kZIr gS & jktLo izkf/kdkfj;ksa ds vkns'k vikLr fd, x, & izkbosV izR;FkhZx.k dks lhekafdr Hkwfe ds Hkw[kaM dks O;;u@vU; laØke.k djus ls vo#) fd;k x;kA ¼iSjk 21 ,oa 22
(1) Land Revenue Code, 1959 (M.P.) -- S.158(1)(b) -- M.B. Land Revenue and Tenancy Act, 1950 -- Ss.54(vii) and 101(1) -- rights of Pucca Tenant and Bhumiswami -- when cannot be accrued -- Government land -- allotted for other than agricultural purposes -- rights of Pucca Tenant and Bhumiswami not accrued on such land. [Para 18
(2) Land Revenue and Tenancy Act, 1950 (M.B.) -- Ss.54(vii) and 101(1) -- M.P. Land Revenue Code, 1959 -- S.158(1)(b) -- rights of Pucca Tenant and Bhumiswami -- when cannot be accrued -- Government land -- allotted for other than agricultural purposes -- rights of Pucca Tenant and Bhumiswami not accrued on such land. [Para 18
(3) Constitution of India -- Art.226 -- scope of powers -- writ petition as PIL -- Government land -- allotted for other than agricultural purposes by Erstwhile Gwalior State -- conditions of Patta breached -- mutation in Bhumiswami rights -- thereafter transfer by registered sale deed and converted into residential and commercial purposes -- registered sale deed cannot be set aside in PIL -- but Patta of Government land was granted for other than agricultural purposes -- same cannot be transferred to private party for residential purposes -- Revenue authorities contrary to settled law -- permitted to transfer and mutation -- certainly High Court has power in PIL to examine such question. [Para 19
(4) Land Revenue and Tenancy Act, 1950 (M.B.) -- S.101(1) -- Government land -- allotted for other than agricultural purposes by Erstwhile Gwalior State -- in violation of terms and conditions of Patta -- land mutated in Bhumiswami rights -- thereafter transferred and converted into residential and commercial purposes -- it is sufficient to initiate proceedings for revocation of Patta -- orders of Revenue authorities set aside -- private respondents restrained from disposing/alienation of plot demarcated at land. [Paras 21 & 22
Jaiswal, J. -- 1. Petitioner has filed this pro bono publico petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging the action of the respondents – State as well as transfer of the land in question on the basis of general power of attorney and thereafter, further allegation by executing registered sale deed in favour of respondent No.14 - M/s. Hanuman Trading Company is non–est on the ground that the land was allotted on special patta on 15.4.1953, for establishment of oil mill to M/s. Jahangir Oil Mill. The land was Government (Nazul land) allotted on patta under section 101 of Madhya Bharat Tenancy Act, 1950. The patta was for specific purpose and was conditional to the effect that if the patta holder uses the land in contravention to the terms and conditions of the patta then the same shall be cancelled. The said allottee had given the land to another person for establishment of godown and thereafter, general power of attorney was executed in favour of Tehmpton Anklesaria for managing, controlling and looking the aforesaid patta, but the general power of attorney holder who belongs from the same Parsi community transferred the land in the name of his wife Nina, sons and their children and wife of the son on 29.1.1994. Thereafter, further sale deed was executed by Tehmpton Anklesaria and transferred the land to the partner of M/s. Hanuman Trading Company by way of registered sale deed vide (Annexure P-5). The petitioner who was Municipal Corporator at the time of filing of the writ petition of ward No.14 where the land in question is situated is assailing the same on the ground that the general power of attorney holder had no right to transfer the land to their family and thereafter further transferred in the favour of M/s. Hanuman Trading Company on the ground that patta was granted in the year 1953 for other than agriculture purpose, i.e., for establishment of oil mill and thus the patta holder had not acquired any Bhumiswami right and, therefore, transfer and alienation through power of attorney is no-nest.
2. Brief facts of the case are that an area of 2.240 hectares of (old survey No.1409/1 and 1410) Survey No.86 was granted on special patta dated 15.4.1953 for setting up oil mill vide Annexure P-1. Clause 3 and 4 of the special patta reads as under :-
ik-ua- 99&52 Lis'ky iV~Vk rglhy dk;kZy;
js;rokjh xk¡oks ds fy;s iV~Vk
xk¡o dk uke jryke] rglhy jryke] ftyk jryke e-iz-
Ñ"kd dk uke rFkk irk mlds firk dk uke & Mqxkath csgjke th ,.M d- ikjlh lkfdu jryke-
[kljk
ua-
jdck fdLe
tehu
jsV
yxku
tek igyh
fdLr
nwljh dSQh;r
fdLr
1409&1
ikSus vkB
75
1410&2
lok rhu
,dM+
414&12
207&7
207&7
2
lokX;k;k chxk
414&12
206&6
206&6
Lis'ky iV~Vsnkj
blds }kjk Åij of.kZr {ks= esa iV~Vsnkj d`"kd LoRo mDr Mqaxkth firk csgjketh tkfr ikjlh dks iznku fd;s tkrs gSA
fnukad 15-9-1953 g- rglhynkj
17-4-1953
jk-jk- jsosU;q lsØsVsjh lkgc eky foHkkx] e-Hkk- 'kklu Xokfy;j ds vkns'k Øekad 16181 oh 51] 12-4-1951 vk/kkj Jheku v.Mj lsdsVjh lkgc ds vkns'k Øekad 16181 dh & 12-4-1951 dh izfrfyfi Jheku lqck lkgc fiykjryke dh vksj ls vkns'k Øekad 6171] 18&4&51 o 1405] 2&2&53 }kjk izkIr gksus ij e-Hkk- eky izca/k rFkk jsosU;q vkxe d`"kdkf/kdkj fo/kku l-2007 dh /kkjk 101¼1½ ds vUrxZr 'kklu us d`f"k ds vk'k;ksa ls vfrfjDr vU; vk'k;ksa ds fy;s vFkkZr ehy cukus ds fy;s [kkrsnkj etdqj dks uhps fy[kh 'krksZ ij Lis'ky iV~Vs ij nh tkuk Lohd`r fd;k gSA
1- bl tehu dk yxku #i;s 75&00 izfr ,dM+ lkykuk iV~Vsnkj dks nsuk gksxkA bl yxku esa izR;sd lsVyesaV ds le; ifjorZu fd;k tk ldsxkA
2- ;g tehu ftl xSjdk'rdkjh dk;ks± ds fy;s nh tk jgh gS mlh dke ds vfrfjDr vU; fdlh dke ds fy;s iV~Vsnkj mldk mi;ksx ugh dj ldrk gSA
3- 'kklu dh Lohd`fr ds fcuk iV~Vsnkj bl tehu dks fdlh dks VªkalQj ugh dj ldsxkA ;fn 'kklu us tehu dks
