Betulal Choudhary Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Hon'ble the Chief Justice - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1127066
CourtMadhya Pradesh High Court
Decided OnFeb-11-2014
AppellantBetulal Choudhary
RespondentThe State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Hon'ble the Chief Justice
Excerpt:
w.p.no.4738/2012 11.02.2014 shri piyush jain, advocate for the petitioners.shri sanjay dwivedi, government advocate for the respondents/state. we deprecate the casual approach of the petitioners in not filing the documents well within time if they wanted to do so, in the wake of clear order passed on 27.01.2014 that no further adjournment will be granted. by way of indulgence, however, we defer hearing of this matter till 9.4.2014. after the aforesaid order was dictated, counsel for the petitioners requested the court to take up the petition for hearing today itself on the available/filed record. accordingly, we proceeded to hear the arguments of the parties. this petition has been filed as public interest litigation challenging the orders passed by the state authorities dated 22nd december, 2010 (annexure p-1) and dated 30th september, 2011 (annexure p-8).the order passed by the board of revenue at gwalior, m.p.(annexure p-1) is, indisputably, in relation to the proceedings under the m.p.ceiling on agricultural holdings act, 1960 wherein the land owner, who has been declared as surplus holder, exercised option. the fact that the petitioners are occupants of some of those lands which have been opted by the original land owner cannot give them locus to challenge the option exercised by the land owner. at best, the petitioners may have the statutory remedy against the said decision and even for that reason the petition presented in the form of public interest litigation is not maintainable. further, the present petition has been filed in this court on 21st march, 2012 challenging the order passed by the board of revenue dated 22nd december, 2010. obviously, therefore, the challenge to that order is barred by laches. the order dated 30th september, 2011 passed by the tehsildar (annexure p-8) is also appealable. if the petitioners are aggrieved by the said order, ought to take recours.to statutory remedy. that will have to be decided in accordance with law. be that as it may, we are not inclined to interfere in exercise of writ jurisdiction and even to entertain this writ petition as public interest litigation. dismissed. (a.m.khanwilkar) (krishn kumar lahoti) chief justice judge s/
Judgment:

W.P.No.4738/2012 11.02.2014 Shri Piyush Jain, Advocate for the petitioneRs.Shri Sanjay Dwivedi, Government Advocate for the respondents/State.

We deprecate the casual approach of the petitioners in not filing the documents well within time if they wanted to do so, in the wake of clear order passed on 27.01.2014 that no further adjournment will be granted.

By way of indulgence, however, we defer hearing of this matter till 9.4.2014.

After the aforesaid order was dictated, counsel for the petitioners requested the Court to take up the petition for hearing today itself on the available/filed record.

Accordingly, we proceeded to hear the arguments of the parties.

This petition has been filed as public interest litigation challenging the orders passed by the State Authorities dated 22nd December, 2010 (Annexure P-1) and dated 30th September, 2011 (Annexure P-8).The order passed by the Board of Revenue at Gwalior, M.P.(Annexure P-1) is, indisputably, in relation to the proceedings under the M.P.Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1960 wherein the land owner, who has been declared as surplus holder, exercised option.

The fact that the petitioners are occupants of some of those lands which have been opted by the original land owner cannot give them locus to challenge the option exercised by the land owner.

At best, the petitioners may have the statutory remedy against the said decision and even for that reason the petition presented in the form of public interest litigation is not maintainable.

Further, the present petition has been filed in this Court on 21st March, 2012 challenging the order passed by the Board of Revenue dated 22nd December, 2010.

Obviously, therefore, the challenge to that order is barred by laches.

The order dated 30th September, 2011 passed by the Tehsildar (Annexure P-8) is also appealable.

If the petitioners are aggrieved by the said order, ought to take recouRs.to statutory remedy.

That will have to be decided in accordance with law.

Be that as it may, we are not inclined to interfere in exercise of writ jurisdiction and even to entertain this writ petition as public interest litigation.

Dismissed.

(A.M.Khanwilkar) (Krishn Kumar Lahoti) Chief Justice Judge S/