Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Basmati vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 22 November, 2019
Author: Vijay Kumar Shukla
Bench: Vijay Kumar Shukla
1 WA-1559-2019
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
WA-1559-2019
(SMT. BASMATI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Jabalpur, Dated : 22-11-2019
Per : Vijay Kumar Shukla, J.-
Shri Roop Singh, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Ajay Gupta, learned Additional Advocate General for the State.
The present intra-court appeal has been filed under Section 2(1) of the
Madhya Pradesh Uchcha Nyayalaya (Knand Nyaypeeth ko Appeal)
Adhiniyam, 2005 being aggrieved by the order dated 02-7-2019 passed by the
learned Single Judge in W.P. No.11653/2018, whereby the writ petition filed
by the petitioner has been dismissed and the petitioner-appellant has been
granted the liberty to avail the alternative remedy of appeal against the order
dated 8-01-2018 passed by the Tehsildar in accordance with law.
It is contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that the
Notification, dated 11-6-2012 for acquisition of land is illegal and arbitrary.
The learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition on the ground of
delay and laches.
We do not perceive any error in the order passed by the learned Single
Judge. The appellant/writ-petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction in the
year 2018 assailing the Notification dated 11-6-2012 issued under Section 4 of
the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Further, the respondent - National Thermal
Power Corporation (NTPC), in the reply, has stated that the land in question has not been acquired.
Learned counsel for the appellant could not produce any material before this Court in order to substantiate that the land in question was acquired by the respondents. Besides, the Notification was issued in the year 2012 and the same was challenged after a period of 6 years. Therefore, the learned Single Judge has rightly dismissed the writ petition on the ground of delay and laches.
It is settled law that delay and latches disentitles the petitioner to any Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR CHATURVEDI Date: 28/11/2019 18:12:45 2 WA-1559-2019 relief. The Supreme Court in the case of Karnataka Power Corporation Ltd., through its Chairman & Managing Director and another Vs. K. Thangappan and another (2006) 4 SCC 322 has ruled thus :
“ Delay or laches is one of the factors which is to be borne in mind by the High Court when they exercise their discretionary powers under Article 226 of the Constitution. In an appropriate case the High Court may refuse to invoke its extraordinary powers if there is such negligence or omission on the part of the applicant to assert his right as taken in conjunction with the lapse of time and other circumstances, causes prejudice to the opposite party. Even where fundamental right is involved the matter is still within the discretion of the Court as pointed out in Durga Prashad Vs. Chief Controller of Imports and Exports (1969) 1 SCC 185. Of course, the discretion has to be exercised judicially and reasonably.†In view of the documents on record and the inordinate delay in filing the petition, the learned Single Judge has rightly dismissed the petition and declined to exercise the power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
We do not find any error in the order passed by the learned Single Judge warranting any interference in the present intra-court appeal. Accordingly, the writ appeal is dismissed.
AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) (VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA)
CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE
ac
Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR
CHATURVEDI
Date: 28/11/2019 18:12:45