Madhya Pradesh High Court
Mdp Infra India Pvt Ltd vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 17 December, 2025
Author: Vishal Mishra
Bench: Vishal Mishra
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:68995
1 WP-47167-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL MISHRA
ON THE 17th OF DECEMBER, 2025
WRIT PETITION No. 47167 of 2025
MDP INFRA INDIA PVT LTD
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Samdarshi Tiwari - Senior Advocate with Shri Shreyas Dubey -
Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri V.S. Choudhary - Government Advocate for the
respondents/State.
ORDER
This petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed seeking following reliefs:-
(i) Issue the Writ in the nature of mandamus or such directions to the Respondent no. 2 as also Respondent No. 01 to act in furtherances of the Notices issued by them for enforcement of the Rules of 2021 for removal of encroachment from the property of the Petitioner and deliver the vacant peaceful possession of the entire property admeasuring 31,800 sq. ft.
(ii) Any other order, writ or directions which this court may deem fit in the interest of justice, equity and good conscience.
It is the case of the petitioner that petitioner company had purchase the land having description as "Plot No.24/3, Sector D, Opposite CIPET Hostel, Near J.K. Road, Industrial Area, Ward no. 65, Govindpura, Tehsil Huzur, Bhopal, admeasuring 31800 sqt ft" in the auction proceeding conducted Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 17-12-2025 18:49:40 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:68995 2 WP-47167-2025 under SARFAESI Act, 2002 by UCO Bank (hereinafter referred to as the Bank). On being declared successful bidder, a sale certificate was issued by the Bank on 16.11.2023 and the same was duly registered before the Sub Registrar Office, Bhopal-3 on 16.11.2023 itself. The petitioner company after registration of the sale certificate requested the respondent No.2, who is the competent Authority designated for allotment of Industrial land/building under the Rule 8 of the Rules of 2021, for execution of a Lease Deed in favour of the Petitioner Company, in pursuant to which the Lease Deed was executed on 21.03.2024. Petitioner has also paid the entire dues and charges as applicable under the Rules as well as conditions of the Lease. Thereafter, at the time of demarcation it was found that there were multiple encroachments including that of respondents No.3 and 4 on the lease area allotted to the petitioner. Various representations were preferred by the petitioner to take necessary actions and to deliver the vacant possession of lease area by removing the encroachment over the premises, but of no consequences and only limited action taken to the extent of issuance of notice to the encroachers for removal of encroachment and no steps have been taken for restoration of the vacant possession of the land/premises to the petitioner. Therefore, this petition has been filed.
It is the case of the petitioner that after getting the execution of lease deed in favour of the petitioner, petitioner has filed an application for demarcation of the property in question and for removal of encroachment. On the said application, the Authorities have carried out spot inspection and demarcation proceedings and thereafter issued notices to the respondents on Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 17-12-2025 18:49:40 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:68995 3 WP-47167-2025 22/05/2024. However, the said notices are not acted upon till date and complaint made by the petitioner for removal of encroachment has not been taken up to a logical end.
Learned State counsel was directed to seek instructions in the matter. On instructions, he has placed on record a joint inspection report in the reference column of ERP. However, the joint inspection report does not reflect any date. It does not reflect that in whose presence the inspection was carried out. No notices were issued to any of the concerned parties and whether this joint inspection report is taken to a logical end or any action has been taken in pursuance to joint inspection report is not reflected. Learned State counsel could not explain the same. However, he fairly submits before this Court that in pursuance to the notice (Annexure-P/7) the proceeding will be initiated and again a joint inspection will be carried out and final order will be passed and if any encroachment is found, the same will be removed within a stipulated time frame. He prays for 90 days to complete the entire exercise.
Considering the request made by respondents, this petition is disposed of directing the respondent No.2 to carry out the proceedings in pursuance to notice Annexure-P/7. They are required to carry out again a joint inspection after issuing notices to the either parties and after granting opportunity of hearing to them, may pass a final order and if the encroachment is found, the same be also removed.
The entire exercise be completed within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 17-12-2025 18:49:40NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:68995 4 WP-47167-2025 With aforesaid observations, the petition is finally disposed of. No order as to costs.
(VISHAL MISHRA) JUDGE Shbhnkr Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 17-12-2025 18:49:40