IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA &

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI WRIT PETITION No. 38302 of 2024 SHAMA KHAN Versus STATE OF MP AND OTHERS Appearance:

Ms Purwa Jain - Advocate for the petitioner.

Shri Vishwajit Joshi – Additional Advocate General for the respondent / State.

Shri Jitendra Verma – Advocate for the respondent No.1.

WITH WRIT PETITION No. 32868 of 2024 DEEPAK VERMA Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Vivek Dalal - Advocate for the petitioner.

Shri Vishwajit Joshi – Additional Advocate General for the respondent / State.

Shri Jitendra Verma – Advocate for the respondent No.1.

Ms Purwa Jain – Advocate for the respondent No.5.

Reserved on : 23.06.2025 Delivered on : 04.07.2025.

ORDER

Per: Justice Vivek Rusia These two writ petitions are being heard and decided together Signature Not Verified Signed by: DIVYANSH as they arise out of interrelated disputes concerning the grant and renewal of mining leases over the adjoining land of Khasra Nos. 33/1/4/3 and 33/1/4/4 each admeasuring 3.642 hectares situated in Village Rawad, Tehsil Depalpur Indore which relates to stone quarrying operations and is governed by the provisions of the Madhya Pradesh Minor Mineral Rules, 1996 (hereinafter referred as "Rules, 1996"). I. In W.P. No. 38302 of 2024 - Shama Khan vs. State of M.P.

02. The petitioner Shama Khan has approached this Court seeking enforcement of his leasehold rights and direction for enquiry and action against officials and responsible authorities involved in the illegal grant of lease in favour of third parties.

03. The case of the petitioner is that he is the legitimate lessee and has been granted a separate mining lease for Khasra No.33/1/4/3 admeasuring 3.642 hectares for which a lease deed was executed in his name on 10.09.2018 which is valid from 21.07.2018 to 20.07.2028 for stone quarrying and establishment of mining operations. Based on this lease, the petitioner had installed machinery at the site and commenced stone quarrying operations in accordance with all applicable rules and regulations.

04. The dispute arose in 2023 when one Mr. Badrilal Damor a third party the lessee of adjoining Khasra No.33/1/4/3/1 admeasuring 2 hectares had filed W.P. No.28475/2023 before this Court alleging that Shama Khan had encroached upon his lease area. Acting upon the allegations but without issuing any notice to the petitioner, the Revenue Inspector conducted a demarcation and submitted a report to the Tehsildar alleging encroachment by Shama Khan. Based on this report, the Collector and authority also ordered the removal of encroachment.

05. This Court also vide order dated 30.11.2023 in that petition ordered for compliance to be done by the Tehsildar. Pursuant to the Signature Not Verified Signed by: DIVYANSH above orders, demolition proceedings for the removal of encroachment were initiated on 15.12.2023 causing a portion of the petitioner’s installed machinery to be dismantled resulting in heavy financial loss to the present petitioner/Shama Khan.

06. The petitioner contended that he came to know about the proceedings by Badrilal only on the date of demolition as he was not made a party to that petition and thus, immediately filed an intervention application in that petition.

07. Pursuant to the filing of the application this Court by its order dated 18.12.2023 stayed the demolition and directed a fresh demarcation of both lease areas—Survey No. 33/1/4/3 (claimed by Shama Khan) and Survey No. 33/1/4/3/1 (claimed by Badrilal). The survey report filed subsequently confirmed that Shama Khan was operating within his demarcated area and that geo-referenced coordinates assigned to the lease of Badrilal overlapped the land already allotted to Shama Khan indicating lapses.

08. This Court in its final order dated 23.01.2024 observed that there are dispute of facts and directed the Mining Officer, Indore to resolve the dispute within 60 days. Pursuant to the fin