Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ramchandra vs Indore Development Officer on 23 September, 2023
Author: Vivek Rusia
Bench: Vivek Rusia
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA
ON THE 23 rd OF SEPTEMBER, 2023
WRIT PETITION No. 6058 of 2016
BETWEEN:-
1. KAILASH S/O LATE RAMCHANDRA KHATI,
VILLAGE BIJALPUR, TEHSIL AND DISTRICT
INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. JAGDISH S/O RAMCHANDRA KHATI
OCCUPATION: FARMER, R/O VILLAGE BIJALPUR,
T E H S I L AND DISTRICT INDORE (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....PETITIONERS
(NONE PRESENT FOR THE PETITIONERS.)
AND
1. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, INDORE
DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, 7, RACE COURSE
ROAD, (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. JOINT DIRECTOR, TOWN AND COUNTRY
PLAN N IN G, SHOPPING COMPLEX, AB RAOD,
INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. COLLECTOR, COLLECTOR OFFICE, MOTI
TABELA, INDORE, DISTRICT INDORE (MADHYA
PRADESH)
4. LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER-CUM-DEPUTY
C O L L E C T O R , O/O COLLECTORATE, MOTI
TABELA, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI YOGESH KUMAR MITTAL, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE
RESPONDENT NO.1.)
T h is petition coming on for orders this day, t h e cou rt passed the
following:
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: DIVYANSH
SHUKLA
Signing time: 23-09-2023
18:46:49
2
ORDER
01. Today, I.A. No.1115/2021, which is an application for dismissal of the petition is taken up for hearing.
02. The petitioner have filed the present petition claiming the relief in view of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair and Transparency in the Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as ''Act of 2013'') since the possession has not been taken from them even after completion of acquisition proceedings.
03. The respondents have filed an application seeking dismissal of writ petition that the scope of Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013 has been answered by constitutional bench in paragraph No.363 of the judgment passed by the Apex Court in case of Indore Development Authority v/s Manohar and others [SLP (C) 9036-9038 of 2016].
04. This application is pending since 2021, in this application respondents pleaded that the possession has been taken on 25.06.1994 and the amount of compensation has been deposited in the office of District Collector in a separate account, therefore, both the conditions given by the Apex Court in paragraph No.363 of the aforesaid judgment has been complied with hence, Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013 will not apply in this case.
05. In view of the above, I.A. No.1115/2021 is allowed.
06. With the aforesaid, Writ Petition is dismissed.
(VIVEK RUSIA) JUDGE Divyansh Signature Not Verified Signed by: DIVYANSH SHUKLA Signing time: 23-09-2023 18:46:49