Full Judgment
---1--- W.P.No.3479/2013 17.4.2013 Shri D.S.Chouhan, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri P.
Kaurav, learned counsel for the State/Respondents No.1 to 4.
Considering the short controveRs.involved in this case, prayer made in the petition, we propose it to dispose of this matter with the consent of the parties finally.
The petitioner has sought following relief :- “1.
To issue a direction to the Respondents No.1 to 4 for giving possession of the lands Kh.
Nos.634, Area 669 Hectare, Kh.
No.640, Area 502 Hactare, Kh.No.644, Area 125 Hactare and Kh.
No.646 Area 408 Hactare situated in village Kanchanpur, Tehsil Maihar District Satna (M.P.) to the Respondent No.5 from Respondent No.6 for Aam Nistar of Public and to restrain the Respondent No.6 for cultivating the above said lands in dispute.”
2. To issue a direction to the Respondents No.1 to 4 to declare the lands Kh.
Nos.634, Area 669 Hectare, Kh.
No.640, Area 502 Hactare, Kh.No.644, Area 125 Hactare and Kh.
No.646 Area 408 Hactare situated in village Kanchanpur, Tehsil Maihar District Satna (M.P.) in Aam Nistar of Villagers/General Public of Gram Panchayat Kanchanpur, Tehsil Maihar, District Satna (M.P.).3.
To grant any other relief which may be deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case with the cost of the litigation.
The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is an Ex-Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Kanchanpur, Tehsil Maihar, District Satna.
The allegations are that Respondent No.6 is trying to dispossess the villagers from Survey Nos.634, 640, 644 ad 646 of village Kanchanpur, Tehsil Maihar, District-Satna and for this purpose notices have been issued ---2--- under Section 248 of M.P.Land Revenue Code.
A resolution has been passed by the Gram Nyalaya, Gondari, Janpad Panchayat Maihar to reserve this land for Nistar purpose.
In this regard a representation Annexure P-6 has been filed before the Collector, Satna for issuing appropriate directions.
It is submitted that Respondent No.1, Collector, Satna, may be directed to consider the representation of the petitioner expeditiously.
Prayer is not opposed by Shri Kaurav, learned counsel for the State, hence it is allowed.
In view of the aforesaid this case is finally disposed of with the following directions :- 1.
The petitioner is directed to serve one more copy of the petition alongwith Annexure P-6 to Respondent No.1 i.e.Collector, Satna and to make a prayer for expeditious hearing of the representation Annexure P-6.”
2. If any such prayer is made by the petitioner within a period of 30 days from today, the Respondent No.1 shall consider and decide the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law expeditiously as far as possible within a period of four months from the date of receipt of the same.
No order as to costs.
C.C., as per rules.
(Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (Smt.
Vimla Jain) Actg.
Chief Justice Judge AK