IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GURPAL SINGH AHLUWALIA ON THE

8th OF FEBRUARY, 2024 WRIT PETITION No. 16882 of 2022 BETWEEN:-

VISHNU LAL UPADHYAYA S/O LATE BHAGWAT PRASAD UPADHYAYA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, OCCUPATION: BUSINESS R/O VILLAGE RICHHAI, TEHSIL JABALPUR, DISTRICT JABALPUR, (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....PETITIONER (BY SHRI MUNISH SAINI - ADVOCATE)

AND

1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

2. COMPETENT AUTHORITY UNDER THE URBAN LAND (CELLING AND REGULATION) ACT COLLECTOR JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

3. SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE RANJHI DISTRICT JABALPUR THROUGH OFFICE SUB DIVISION MAGISTRATE RANJHI DISTRICT JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

4. TEHSILDAR RANJHI THROUGH OFFICE OF TEHSILDAR RANJHI DISTRICT JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI NAVEEN DUBEY – GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE )

………………………………………………………………………………………

This petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following:

O R D E R

This petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed seeking the following reliefs :-

“(i) That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to decide the representation /applications made by the petitioner. (ii) To grant any other relief which this Hon’ble High Court deems fit and proper.”

2. It is fairly conceded by counsel for petitioner that the case in hand is duly covered by an order passed today separately in connected Writ Petition No.3118/2014 (Vishnu Lal Upadhyay Vs.

The State of M.P. and others).

3. Considered the submissions made by counsel for parties.

4. This Court in the case of Vishnu Lal Upadhyay (supra) has passed the following order :-

“This petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed against the order dated 01.09.2011 passed by competent authority under the Urban Land Ceiling Act (Collectorate) Jabalpur in Revenue Case No.16/A- 90(B-9)/84-85 and order dated 24.01.2014 passed by Additional Commissioner (Revenue), Jabalpur in Case No.316/A-90(B-9)/13-14.

2. The facts necessary for disposal of the present petition in short are that Khasra No.277, area 0.725 hectares of land was declared surplus under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976. Thereafter the petitioner filed an application for mutation of his name in respect of aforesaid property on the ground that since the possession of the same was not taken, therefore, in the light of Section 4 of Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999, the proceedings which were initiated under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 have abated. The said application was rejected by Additional Collector, Jabalpur by order dated 01.09.2011 on the ground that the possession of the property was duly taken and, therefore, the proceedings have not abated. The appeal filed by the petitioner against the said order has been dismissed by order dated 24.01.2014.

3. Now the only question for consideration is as to whether the possession of the property, which was declared as surplus was ever taken by the authorities or not?

4. The State counsel has produced the original record of the ceiling proceedings.

5. From the ordersheets of the ceiling proceedings it appears that the notification under section 10(1) of Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 was published on 02.12.1988 and as per the ordersheet dated 09.05.1989, a direction was given to send the notification under section 10(3) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 for publication and the case was fixed for 17.07.1989. On 17.07.1989 the case was adjourned on account of non-availability of the Presiding Officer and the case was fixed for 31.08.2019.

6. As per ordersheet dated 31.08.2019, it is clear that the notification under section 10(3) of Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 was published on 23.06.1989 and accordingly a direction was given to issue notice to the concerning person to handover the possession of the l