IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI ON THE 14^th OF NOVEMBER, 2022 WRIT PETITION No. 5603 of 1999 BETWEEN:-

1. AAM JANATA & ORS. (MADHYA PRADESH)

2. GANESH PRASAD S/O MAHADEV, AGED ABOUT

75 YEARS, VILLAGE MADARI TAHSIL TEONTHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

3. RAM SUPHAL S/O BHAIYA RAM, AGED ABOUT

70 YEARS, VILLAGE MADARI TAHSIL TEONTHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

4. SUKHENDRA PRASAD S/O UMA SHANKAR, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, VILLAGE MADARI TAHSIL TEONTHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....PETITIONER (NONE)

AND

1. STATE OF M.P. & ORS. (MADHYA PRADESH)

2. MADHYA PRADESH BOARD OF REVENUE MOTI MAHAL MOTI MAHAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

3. COMMISSIONER REWA DIVISION REWA DIVISION (MADHYA PRADESH)

4. COLLECTOR REWA REWA (MADHYA PRADESH) 5. NAIB TAHSILDAR INCHARGE CIRCILE DABHAURA TAHSIL TEONTHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

6. SUMER BAHADUR ALIAS RAM SUMER S/O RAM SAJIWAN, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, VILLAGE Signature Not Verified MADARI TAHSIL TEONTHAR (MADHYA SAN PRADESH)

Digitally signed by VINAY KUMAR

7. ADITYA SHANKAR ALIAS SHIVAM MINOR THROUGH NATURAL GUARDIAN FATHER RAM SUMER S/O RAM SUMER, AGED ABOUT 12 YEARS, VILLAGE MADARI TAHSIL TEONTHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI PRAVEEN NAMDEO- GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE) (SHRI SANJAY AGRAWAL- SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH SHRI SHUBHAM MISHRA- ADVOCATE)

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

ORDER

In this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the order of the Naib Tehsildar as well as order of Board of Revenue on the ground that land allotted to the respondent No.6 is in contravention of the Act known as M.P. Krishi Prayojan Ke Liye Upyog Ki Ja Rahi Dakhal Rahit Bhoomi par Bhoomiswami Adhikaron Ka Pradan Kiya Jana (Vishesh Upbandh) Adhiniyam, 1984.

Learned counsel for the respondents pointed out that this petition is basically in the nature of public interest and the petitioners here are no way concerned with land in question. The petitioner No. 2 died on 25.01.2012 and petitioner No.3 died on 30.09.2010. Though, the applications have been filed in the belated stage in the year 2018 but there is no one to press the applications. Even on merits, no relief can be granted to the petitioners, since no cause of action accrues to the petitioners in person.

In view of the aforesaid, nothing survives for adjudication in this matter.

Accordingly, this petition is dismissed No order as to costs.

Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by VINAY KUMAR (S. A. DHARMADHIKARI)

JUDGE vinay*

Signature Not Verified SAN