Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Saraswati Devi Yadav vs Viraj Infra on 6 August, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:36686
1 RP-642-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEEPAK KHOT
ON THE 6 th OF AUGUST, 2025
REVIEW PETITION No. 642 of 2025
SMT. SARASWATI DEVI YADAV AND OTHERS
Versus
VIRAJ INFRA AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Mukhtar Ahmad - Advocate for the petitioners.
Shri Amitabh Gupta - Advocate for the respondent R-1.
Shri Adarsh Singh Chauhan - Advocate for the respondent No.2.
ORDER
Heard on IA No. 13918/2025, an application for condonation of delay in filing the review petition.
For the reasons mentioned in the application and as stated by learned counsel for the petitioners, IA No. 13918/2025 is allowed.
The delay in filing the review petition is hereby condoned. With the consent of parties, the matter is heard finally.
The present review petition has been filed by the petitioners for reviewing/modifying the order dated 11.03.2025 passed in MP No. 3942/2024, whereby, the petition submitted by the respondent/non-applicant No.1 has been dismissed by this Court holding that under supervisory jurisdiction the order assailed cannot be modified having limited jurisdiction. The finding of the Court in para-5 is to the effect that the proceeding Signature Not Verified Signed by: RAGHVENDRA SHARAN SHUKLA Signing time: 08-08-2025 16:13:13 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:36686 2 RP-642-2025 initiated by the respondent No. 1 has been rightly culminated into the order passed by the SDO and which cannot be interfered with under the limited/supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. It has also been observed that the order passed by the SDO be implemented and if any defect is noticed by the petitioner therein, the same can be raised at an appropriate stage.
The petitioners herein were respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in the petition wherein the order has been passed, which is under review, have filed the present petition for the reliefs, which are as under:-
(A) The Hon'ble Court be pleased to clarify that the appellate authority i.e. Additional Collector, Jabalpur would be free to decide the appeal u/s 44(1) MPLRC against the order dated 05.07.2024 passed by SDO (Revenue) Adhartal, Jabalpur on its own merits without being influenced by any observation made by this Hon'ble Court in the order dated 11.03.2025.
(B) The Hon'ble Court be pleased to clarify that the appellate authority Additional Collector, Jabalpur would be free to consider the effect of inherent jurisdictional defect in the order dated 05.07.2024 relating to the lack of written permission of the Collector before entertaining the application u/s 115 MPLRC filed by the petitioner SDO Adhartal, Jabalpur.
(C) Any other modification/clarification which the Hon'ble Court deem fit be made in the order dated 11.03.2025.
It is the case of the petitioners that as against the order dated 05.07.2024 the petition of the respondent No.1 has been dismissed and the said order has been affirmed, their appeal pending before the appellate authority may be dismissed taking shelter of this order. It is his case that as his grounds in the appeal have not been considered by this Court in the order under review and it has been dismissed finding that the Court having limited/supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India cannot interfere with the impugned order, it may prejudice his case before the appellate authority. It is his case that the observation be made that Signature Not Verified Signed by: RAGHVENDRA SHARAN SHUKLA Signing time: 08-08-2025 16:13:13 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:36686 3 RP-642-2025 this order may not come in the way of the authority to decide his appeal by applying its mind on the basis of law and jurisdiction.
Per contra, it has been submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents that once the matter has been decided by this Court finding that there is no jurisdictional error in the impugned order, the appellate authority does not have any jurisdiction to reopen the matter on jurisdiction as well as modify the order.
This Court on going through the record as well as the pleadings in the petition and the findings arrived at by this Court while deciding the miscellaneous petition has found that the Court has not touched the case of the petitioners at all and only the case of the respondents has been considered. The Court has also not opined that the order would govern the disposal of the appeal filed by the petitioners herein. The petitioners are having independent right under MPLRC to challenge the impugned order under the appellate jurisdiction and the appellate authority has to see its jurisdiction, law and the findings of the lower authority to pass an appropriate order under the appellate jurisdiction.
As it has already been observed by this Court that the Court in the order under review has not opined on the merits of the appeal of the petitioners, the appellate authority is directed to decide the appeal on its own merit applying its own mind without getting influenced by the findings arrived at by this Court in the order under review. All the points are open for the respondents to raise before the authority in respect to jurisdiction and decision taken by this Court before the appellate authority.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: RAGHVENDRA SHARAN SHUKLA Signing time: 08-08-2025 16:13:13NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:36686 4 RP-642-2025 Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observation.
(DEEPAK KHOT) JUDGE RAGHVENDRA Signature Not Verified Signed by: RAGHVENDRA SHARAN SHUKLA Signing time: 08-08-2025 16:13:13