IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANAND PATHAK &

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA YADAV WRIT APPEAL No. 1336 of 2025 CHANDRA KUMAR SAHANI AND OTHERS Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri N.K.Gupta – Senior Advocate with Shri S.D.Singh – Advocate for the appellant.

Shri Ankur Mody – Additional Advocate General for respondents No.1 and 2/State.

Shri Somyadeep Dwivedi – Advocate for respondent No.3.

J U D G M E N T

(Delivered on this 11^th day of December 2025)

Per: Justice Anand Pathak The present Writ Appeal under Section 2 (1) of The Madhya Pradesh Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyaypeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 is preferred by the appellants being aggrieved by the order dated 22.03.2025 passed by the learned Writ Court in W.P.No.3066/2008, whereby the petition filed by the petitioner has been dismissed.

2. Precisely stated, facts of the case are as under :-

(i) For appreciating the controversy in better perspective, following list of dates and events is important for consideration :-

DATE EVENTS

26.08.1981 Lease deed was executed in favour of late Shri Sitaram Sahani (predecessor of the present appellant).

24.03.1990 Lease deed dt.26.08.1981 was cancelled by respondents No.1 and 2 in view of failure of the lessee to establish and operationalize an industry as contemplated.

03/05/95 Order of cancellation of lease was set aside by this Court in M.P. No.1648/1990. It was further directed in the order that the petitioner (predecessor of the present applicants) would take steps to run the industry and will satisfy the respondents with compliance of conditions prescribed in lease deed.

20.06.1996 Letter and Panchnama prepared by Inspector, District Trade Center, Gwalior was forwarded to Mahaprabandhak. It was stated therein that subject property allotted to Shri Sitaram Sahani was lying vacant; there was neither any construction on the plot nor any material was found for starting it.

August 1996 Civil Suit No.65A/1996 (New No.57A/2007) was filed by one Harimohan Sharma against Sitaram Sahani (Predecessor of present appellants) and present Respondent District Industrial Center, Gwalior and State of M.P. Through Collector. Relief of injunction was sought by Plaintiff Harimohan Sharma against the defendants apparently in respect of subject property among others. It was alleged in the Writ Petition that an order of temporary injunction was passed in said civil suit. However, the copy of said order has neither been produced in the present nor was it brought on record while the writ petition is pending.

10/09/96 Shri Sitaram Sahani died.

04.12.2002, Respondent No.3 made repeated representations to 20.02.2003, respondent No.2 for allotment of subject property for 05.08.2003 & expansion of his business. The Respondent No.3 has 22.09.2003. made such requests as he had already been operating is business of stone cutting and polishing in the contiguous plot No.23.

20.08.2004 Letter issued by respondent No.1 and 2 to appellant No.1 Chandra Kumar Sahani and another person- Harish Sahani also referred to as son late Shri Sitaram Sahani. Revival of cancellation of lease executed in favour of Sitaram Sahani was communicated to his legal (ii) Learned Writ Court vide order dt.22.03.2025 dismissed the aforesaid petition. Hence, present appeal..

3. It is the submission of learned senior counsel for the appellants that earlier allotment in favour of late Shri Sitaram Sahani as well as lease deed was cancelled, therefore, W.P.No.1648/1990 was filed before this Court (alongwith other lease holders) and said bunch of writ petitions was decided vide order dt.03.05.1995 and the order of cancellation of lease was set aside. Thereafter, one Harimohan Sharma filed Civil Suit No.65A/1996 against the State as well as late Shri Sitaram Sahani. In that civil suit, temporary injunction/interim order was passed whereby parties were directed to maintain status quo, therefore, construction over the plot in question could not