Madhya Pradesh High Court
Hari Shankar Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 24 March, 2022
Author: Vishal Mishra
Bench: Vishal Mishra
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL MISHRA
ON THE 24th OF MARCH, 2022
WRIT PETITION No. 6284 of 2022
Between:-
HARI SHANKAR SHARMA S/O SHRI SHYAMLAL
SHARMA , AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
COLONIZER PROP./PARTNER OF M/S NARMADA
INFRATEC R/O HOUSE NO. 85//11 EKTA CHOWK
NARMADAPURAM HOSHANGABAD DISTRICT
HOSHANGABAD M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI K.K. GAUTAM, ADVOCATE )
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF
REVENUE VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL M.P.
VALLABH BHAWAN, BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. COLLECTOR HOSHANGABAD DISTRICT-
HOSHANGABAD (M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. S.D.O. (REVENUE) HOSHANGABAD DISTRICT-
HOSHANGABAD (M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH)
4. NAIB TEHSILDAR HOSHANGABAD TEHSIL AND
DISTRICT HOSHANGABAD, M.P. (RURAL)
(MADHYA PRADESH)
5. DEPUTY DIRECTOR NAGAR TATHA GRAM
NIVESH, HOSHANGABAD, HARDA GINNI
COMPOUND, NEAR MINIAKSHI SQUARE,
HOSHANGABAD, DISTRICT- HOSHANGABAD, M.P.
(MADHYA PRADESH)
6. RAKESH YADAV S/O NOT KNOWN VILLAGE
KULAMDI, DISTRICT- HOSHANGABAD (M.P.),
THROUGH; STATION HOUSE OFFICER POLICE
STATION DEHAT (KULAMDI), DISTRICT-
HOSHANGABAD, M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(RESPONDENTS/STATE BY SHRI ROHIT JAIN, GOVT. ADVOCATE )
T h is petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
The present petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs:
Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA Date: 2022.04.05 11:03:21 IST"(i) Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash impugned 2 show cause notice dt. 24.8.2021 and 07.12.2021 contained in Annexure P/8 issued by respondent No.5.
(ii) Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the Naib Tehsildar, Hoshangabad to get demarcated the land in question by giving full opportunity to the parties concerned by virtue of applications contained in Annexure P/10 within a time bound frame and untill and unless demarcation of the land in question is not done, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner, in the interest of justice.
(iii) Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be issued in favour of the petitioner along with cost of the petition."
It is pointed out that the petitioner is a Colonizer by profession and is having no stigma over him since last several years. He is continuously working as a Colonizer and is having license of Colonizer in the name of M/s Narmada Infratec dated 09.1.2018. He purchased a land vide registered sale-deeds dated 16.11.2017. and 08.02.2018 and the land got diverted under the provisions of Section 172 (1) of Bhoomi Ka Awasiya Prayojanarth Vyapavartan M.P. Land Revenue Code, 1959 on 26.07.2018 by the Sub Divisional Officer, Hoshangabad. The Sub Divisional officer has issued license for development of the land in question vide order dated 12.10.2018. An application was moved by the petitioner on 20.07.2012 to the Deputy Director, Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh, Hoshangabad under the provisions of Section 30 of the M.P. Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973 and Rule 27(1) of M.P. Bhoomi Vikas Niyam, 2012 as well as under the provisions of Hoshangabad Development Scheme, 2012. The map was got sanctioned with respect to the land in question. After developing the land in question, he has sold out the plots to various purchasers.
It is submitted that a false and frivolous complaint has been made by one Rakesh Yadav, i.e. respondent No.6 who as per the knowledge of the petitioner is a fake identity. The authorities have taken cognizance on the complaint made Signature Not Verified against the petitioner and show cause notice dt. 24.08.2021 & 07.12.2021 were SAN Digitally signed by SUSHEEL KUMAR issued asking for presence of the petitioner in the office of the Deputy Director, JHARIYA Date: 2022.04.05 11:03:21 IST Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Hoshangabad alongwith all the relevant documents. It is 3 submitted that the petitioner by seeking proper permission from the authorities has developed the entire land and the plots have already been sold, but now under the garb of afalse and frivolous complaint, he has been harassed by the respondents authorities. A detailed representation has been submitted by the petitioner and the same is pending consideration. Therefore, an innocuous prayer is made to direct the authorities to consider and decide the pending representation within a stipulated time frame.
Counsel appearing for the State vehemently opposed the prayer and submitted that it is only a show cause notice have been issued to the petitioner on 24.08.2021 and 07.12.2021 asking for his presence in the office alongwith relevant documents. No coercive action has been taken against the petitioner till date. No cause of action arises to the petitioner for filing the present petition. A petition against a show cause itself is not maintainable in terms of the law laid by Hon'ble Supreme Court in various cases. It is argued that the petitioner is also is having a remedy under Section 29(3) of the M.P. Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973. In such circumstances, the petition itself is not maintainable and prays for dismissal of the same.
Heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the record. From a perusal of the record, it is seen that it is only show cause notices which have been issued to the petitioner asking for his presence before the Deputy Director, Nagat Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, Hoshangabad alongwith all the relevant documents. The petitioner instead of approaching the authorities alongwith all the relevant documents has filed this petition directly before this Court. It is submitted representation is being submitted before the authorities which is pending consideration. however, the fact remains no action has been taken against the petitioner till date by the uahtorities. By issuance of a show cause notice, he has been called by the authorities to demonstrate by way of relevant documents the act which has been done by the petitioner after taking all the permission in accordance with law from the competent authorities. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Kunishetty Satyanarayan reported in (2006) 12 SCC 28 Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA Date: 2022.04.05 11:03:21 IST has held that no writ petition is maintainable against a show cause notice or charge 4 sheet.
In such circumstances, a petition directly before this Court itself is not maintainable against a show cause notice. The petitioner may approach the concerning authorities in pursuance to the show cause notice issued to him and may file a detailed response to the same alongwith relevant documents. As on date, no relief can be extended to the petitioner in view of the law laid by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid case.
Petition sans merits and is accordingly dismissed.
Howerver. a liberty is extended to the petitioner to approach them concerning authorities alongwith all the relevant documents for redressal of his grievances.
(VISHAL MISHRA) JUDGE sj Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA Date: 2022.04.05 11:03:21 IST