IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR WP No. 35555 of 2025 (ARTI KATARE Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS )

Dated : 06-01-2026 Shri Ashish Kumar Mishra - Advocate for the petitioner.

Issue notice to the respondents on payment of process fee within seven working days by RAD mode, returnable in four weeks, failing which this petition shall stand dismissed without further reference to the Court.

Heard on the question of interim relief.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that in similar circumstances in W.P. No.42570/2025, this Court vide order dated 10/11/2025 has extended interim relief to the petitioner therein. He has placed reliance upon provisions of the Colony Development Rules, 2021 specifically referring to Rule 22 which deals with Action against the development of unauthorised colonies wherein Clause 4 is relevant, which reads as under :-

"(4) In case, the development/construction is not removed in the unauthorised colony within the period specified in sub-rule (3) hereinabove, the competent authority shall take action for removal of the development/construction and also file complaint against the developer and landowner in the concerned police station for taking necessary penal action under the relevant provisions of the Act."

He has further relied upon Section 339-C of the M.P. Municipalities Act, 1961 and has argued that Clauses 1 and 2 deal with the offences being carried out while doing illegal colonization, specifically referred to Clause 3 which provides that the Courts are having powers for imposing punishment and fine. The relevant reads as under :-

"(3) Whoever commits or abets the commission of an offence of illegal diversion or illegal colonization shall be punished with an imprisonment of not less than three years and not more than seven years and with a minimum fine of ten thousand rupees, and the Court may, in passing the judgment in respect of any such offence, order the accused to pay to the Council, such amount of compensation as specified in the judgment, taking into consideration the amount required to be incurred towards the development of such illegal colony, and such offence shall be a cognizable offence."

He has referred to impugned order pointing out the fact that such exercise is being carried out by the respondent No.3/ Additional Collector who is not a competent authority. It is the Court which can impose fine upon the petitioner. Therefore, he prays for similar interim relief as granted in W.P. No.42570/2025.

Considering the aforesaid, as a matter of interim relief, the effect and operation of the impugned order dated 03.07.2025 is stayed till the next date of hearing.

State counsel is at liberty to file response along with the stay vacating application.

List along with Writ Petition No.42570/2025 for analogous hearing.

Certified copy as per rules.

(VISHAL MISHRA)

JUDGE AM