Madhya Pradesh High Court
Mathura Prasad Patel vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 23 January, 2023
Author: Chief Justice
Bench: Ravi Malimath, Vishal Mishra
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH,
CHIEF JUSTICE
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL MISHRA
ON THE 23 rd OF JANUARY, 2023
WRIT PETITION No. 27252 of 2022
BETWEEN:-
MATHURA PRASAD PATEL, S/O SHRI HEERALAL PATEL,
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE,
R/O VILLAGE SADDUPURA, POST BAMITHA, TEHSIL
RAJNAGAR, DISTRICT CHHATARPUR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI RAMAKANT AWASTHY - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH, THROUGH
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT AND
RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, VALLABH
BHAWAN, BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. THE COMMISSIONER, SAGOUR DIVISION,
SAGOUR, DISTRICT SAGOUR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
3. THE COLLECTOR, COLLECTOR OFFICE
C H H A T A R P U R , DISTRICT CHHATARPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
4. THE SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER, SDO OFFICE
R A J N A G A R , TEHSIL RAJNAGAR, DISTRICT
CHHATARPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
5. THE TAHSILDAR, TAHSIL OFFICE RAJNAGAR,
DISTRICT CHHATARPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
6. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, PWD
DEPARTMENT, CHHATARPUR, DISTRICT
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: TAJAMMUL
HUSSAIN KHAN
Signing time: 1/25/2023
3:21:44 PM
2
CHHATARPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
7. THE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL HIGHWAY
AUTHORITY OF INDIA, DIVISION CHHATARPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
8. RAMRAJA CONSTRUCTION CO., ORCHHA,
DISTRICT NIWARI (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI AMIT SETH - DEPUTY ADVOCATE GENERAL FOR RESPONDENTS
NO.1 TO 6 AND SHRI MOHAN SAUSARKAR - ADVOCATE FOR
RESPONDENT NO.7)
This petition coming on for admission this day, Hon'ble Shri Justice
Ravi Malimath, Chief Justice passed the following:
ORDER
The petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:-
"(I) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ and direct to the respondent authority to demarcate the effected land of the petitioners situated in between the Bamitha to Khajuraho National Highway No.339-B road, in interest of justice.
(II) That, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue appropriate writ and direct to the respondent authority to follow the acquirement proceeding and also paid appropriate compensation to the petitioner and villagers whose land effected/acquired by the respondent authority, in the interest of justice.
(III) Any other relief/order/direction/prod which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also kindly be granted to the petitioner along with cost of entire litigation."
2. The State have filed their reply in connected Writ Petition No.25449 of 2022 wherein they have stated in paragraphs 4 to 7 as follows:
"4. That the answering respondents submit that contention of the petitioners that construction of Four Lane road is being carried out by the answering respondents is factually incorrect and therefore denied. It is submitted that the road in question namely Signature Not Verified Signed by: TAJAMMUL HUSSAIN KHAN Signing time: 1/25/2023 3:21:44 PM 3 Four Lane Bamitha to Khajuraho Section of NH 339-B was constructed way back in the year 2008 by the MPPWD and at the relevant time, no objection whatsoever was raised by the petitioners. It is further submitted that said road has been transferred to the NHPWD vide order dt.29/4/2019 and Clause (8) of the said handing over order clearly spells out that average width of the road in question is 26 Meters. Copy of the transfer order dt.29/4/2019 is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE R/1. 5 . That, the answering respondents thus categorically submit and assert that at present they are not making any fresh construction of road and they are only carrying over exercise of upgradation and strengthening of the already existing road, which was constructed way back in the year 2008. It is further submitted that work of strengthening and upgradation is being carried out within the boundaries already existing and therefore, contention of the petitioners that new Four Land road is allegedly constructed by the respondents is factually incorrect. 6 . That, the answering respondents further submit that in the present process of upgradation and strengthening of already existing road in question, no lands of the petitioners are either being affected or are likely to be affected.
7. It is further submitted that when the work of upgradation and strengthening of the already existing road was sought to be u n d erta ken by the answering respondents, representation dt.08.03.2022 was submitted by the petitioners and other villagers seeking demarcation of their lands. Copy of the representation dt.08.03.2022 submitted by the petitioners and other villagers is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE R/2.
3. The National Highways Authority of India has also filed the reply, wherein they have stated in paragraph-4 as follows:
"4. It is brought to the knowledge of this Hon'ble Court that road from Bamitha to Khajuraho (NH no.339-B) is been maintaining and constructing by the State Government through respondent no.6 and there is no such roll of the answering responding, in this instant writ petition as the other respondent particular State Government, shall address this Hon'ble on the legal issue."
4. Under these circumstances, we do not find that the petitioner would have any grievance in the matter. What is being done by the respondents is clear and Signature Not Verified Signed by: TAJAMMUL HUSSAIN KHAN Signing time: 1/25/2023 3:21:44 PM 4 cogent. There cannot be a dispute or a challenge to the same. Hence, we find no good ground to interfere in the petition. Consequently, the petition being devoid of merit, is dismissed.
(RAVI MALIMATH) (VISHAL MISHRA)
CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE
taj
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: TAJAMMUL
HUSSAIN KHAN
Signing time: 1/25/2023
3:21:44 PM