Madhya Pradesh High Court
Tulsiram Chadar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 10 September, 2015
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, JABALPUR
Writ Appeal No.682 of 2015
Tulsiram Chadar
Vs.
State of M.P. & others
Present : Hon. Shri Justice Rajendra Menon
Hon. Shri Justice S.K.Seth
Shri Mohan Lal Sharma, counsel for appellant.
Shri P.Jain, P.L., for respondents.
Whether approved for reporting: Yes/No.
ORDER
(10.9.2015) Calling in question tenability of order dated 14.8.2015 passed by writ Court in W.P.No.10786/2015, this writ appeal has been filed.
2. The appellant claims to be in possession of the land in question as indicated in the petition and it is said that the land was in possession with the ancestors of appellant even before the M.P.Land Revneue Code, 1950 came into force. It is said that the settlement process was conducted much before the coming into force of the Land Revenue Code and 2 the erstwhile Zamindars and Malguzars gave the land to the ancestors of petitioner as they were working as Kotwars and since then the petitioner is in possession. Claiming Bhumiswami rights on basis of the order passed by Chhattisgarh High Court and directions issued by the Department of Revenue, Government of Madhya Pradesh vide circular dated 3.3.2010 the writ petition was filed. The writ Court having dismissed the same, this appeal under section under section 2(1) of the M.P.Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyaypeeth Ko Appeal), Adhiniyam, 2005.
3. Shri Mohan Lal Sharma, learned counsel for appellant invites our attention to an order passed by this Court based on the circular in question wherein it has been directed by this Court that the claim for Bhumiswami rights by persons identically situated like the petitioner be examined in the light of circular dated 3.3.2010, the stipulations contained therein and a decision taken. Even though such a direction was passed in the cases of other similarly situated petitioners, it is said that the writ Court did not consider the same. In W.P.No.939/2009 on 17.1.2013 similar questions were considered and after taking note of the circular dated 3.3.32010 the petition was disposed of in the following manner :-
"7. In the present case, petitioners claim has not been examined in the light of the circulars as are issued by the State Government from time to time and as the cases of individuals have not been examined, it is a fit case where the competent authority of the Government should be directed to examine the case of each individual petition on its own merits and after evaluating the same in the light of the requirements of the policies and circulars 3 of the State Government, as contained in Annexure R/3 dated 3.3.2010, or any other circular in this regard issued earlier or subsequently, decide the claim of each of the individual in accordance to law by a speaking order within a period of six months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
8. Each of the petitioners shall submit a detailed claim indicating the particulars of the land, the period when it was given and other details necessary for deciding their claim. The competent authority shall examine the claim in accordance to the requirement of the circulars as indicated hereinabove and take a decision within a period of six months, and communicate the decision to the petitioners.
9. With the aforesaid, the petition stands disposed of."
4. Keeping in view the aforesaid, we allow this appeal and quash the order passed by the writ Court and direct that the writ petition be disposed of in terms of the directions issued hereinabove and passed by this Court on 17.1.2013 in W.P.No.939 of 2009.
5. Tîll the matter is not decided, as directed herein status- quo with regard to the possession as is existing today, shall be maintained.
6. With the aforesaid, this appeal is allowed and disposed of.
(RAJENDRA MENON) (S.K.SETH)
JUDGE JUDGE
M
4