Madhya Pradesh High Court
WP/22392/2023 of BAGDIRAM Vs UPPER COLLECTOR on 2 February 2024
COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHAT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARION THE 2[nd] OF FEBRUARY, 2024
WRIT PETITION No. 22392 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
BAGDIRAM S/O SHRI MANGILAL, AGED ABOUT 60Y E A R S , OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURALIST, R/OVILLAGE NANDNI, TEHSIL KALAPIPAL, DISTRICTSHAJAPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
(SHRI JANMEJAY RANJAN SAHU, ADVOCATE)
.....PETITIONER
AND
1.UPPER COLLECTOR, MANDSAUR (MADHYAPRADESH)PRADESH)
2.SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER, DISTRICT MANDSAUR(MADHYA PRADESH)(MADHYA PRADESH)
3.NAIB TEHSILDAR, TEHSIL TAPPA DHUNDAKKAR,DISTRICT MANDSAUR (MADHYA PRADESH)DISTRICT MANDSAUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
4.VINOD GAUD D/O AWANTIPRASAD GAUD, AGEDABOUT 35 YEARS, OCCUPATION:AGRICULTURIST, R/O TEHSIL DHAMNAR,DISTRICT MANDSAUR (MADHYA PRADESH)ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCCUPATION:AGRICULTURIST, R/O TEHSIL DHAMNAR,DISTRICT MANDSAUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
5.CHANDRAPRAKASH GAUD D/O AWANTIPRASADGAUD, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, OCCUPATION:AGRICULTURALIST, TEHSIL DHAMNARDISTRICT MANDSAUR (MADHYA PRADESH)GAUD, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, OCCUPATION:AGRICULTURALIST, TEHSIL DHAMNARDISTRICT MANDSAUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
6.SHAKTIPAL SINGH GAUD D/O AWANTIPRASADGAUD, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, OCCUPATION:AGRICULTURALIST, TEHSIL DHAMNAR,DISTRICT MANDSAUR (MADHYA PRADESH)GAUD, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, OCCUPATION:AGRICULTURALIST, TEHSIL DHAMNAR,DISTRICT MANDSAUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
(SHRI BHUWAN DESHMUKH, GOVT. ADVOCATE)
.....RESPONDENTS
This petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed thefollowing:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
Heard on the question of admission and interim relief.
2. Looking to the nature of order this Court is inclined to pass, notice to the respondents is not necessary, since, barely legal question of law is involved.
3. In this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, thepetitioner has assailed the order dated 13.09.2022 passed by AdditionalCollector in case No. 47/Revision/2022-23 whereby the revision has beenrejected on the ground of maintainability.
4. The brief facts of the case, the petitioner is the owner of the landsituated at Survey No.1789, 1788, 1780,1787 situated at Tehsil TappaDhundakka, District Mandsaur (M.P.). The respondent No.4, 5 and 6 are theowner of the land situated at Survey No.1781, 1779/1,1779/2, 1779/3, 1779/4and 1778 situated at Tehsil- Tappa Dhundakka, District Mandsaur. The land ofthe petitioner and respondent Nos. 4,5 and 6 are adjacent to each other. On19.09.2019, the respondent filed an application under Section 131 of the M.P.Land Revenue Code,1959 before Naib Tehsildar seeking relief to use theboundary of the petitioner as the way to their land. Vide order dated02.03.2022, the application was allowed directing the petitioner to removeobstacles from the way and not interrupt the respondent in future.
5. Being aggrieved, the petitioner challenged the order dated 02.03.2022in appeal No. 009/Appeal/2022-23 before the Sub-Divisional Officer. The Sub-Divisional Officer rejected the appeal filed by the petitioner, vide order dated11.07.2022. Against the said order, the petitioner filed a revision under Section50 of the M.P. Land Revenue Code, 1959 before the Collector, Mandsaur.
Vide the impugned order dated 13.09.2022, the Additional Collector rejectedthe revision filed by the petitioner on the ground that instead of availing theremedy under Section 44(2) of the MPLRC, the petitioner has filed a revisionunder Section 50, which is not maintainable.
6 . Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that there is a bar offiling Second Appeal under Section 46 (b) of the MPLRC, therefore, the Addition Collector has misinterpreted the provisions and passed a wrongorder. In fact, the revision lies before the Collector, therefore, it is prayed thatthe impugned order deserves to be set aside and the matter needs to beremanded back to the Collector for fresh adjudication in accordance with law.
7. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
8. Section 46 of the MP Land Revenue Code reads as under:
'46. No appeal against certain orders.-Notwithstanding anything contained in Section 44,- (a) no appeal shall lie from an order,-
(i) allowing or rejecting an application for condonation of delayon the grounds specified in Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963on the grounds specified in Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963
(No. 36 of 1963); or
(ii) rejecting an application for revision; or
(iii) allowing or rejecting an application for stay; or
(iv) of an interim nature; or
(v) passed under the provisions of Sections 29, 30, 104, 106,114A, 127, 146, 147, 150, 152, 161, 207, 208, 210, 212, 213, 215,220 and 243; and (b) no second appeal shall lie from an order passed in first appealagainst an order passed under the provisions of sub-section (1) ofSection 131, Section 134, Section 173, Section 234, Section 239,Section 240, Section 241, Section 242, Section 244 and Section 248.]'
9 . On perusal of the Section 46(b), no second appeal lies against the order passed under sub-section (1) of Section 131 of the MPLRC, therefore, the findings of the Collector is perverse and liable to be set aside.
1 0 . Accordingly, the impugned order dated 13.09.2022 passed in47/Revision/2023-24 by the Additional Collector, Mandsaur is hereby set asideand the Collector, Mandsaur is directed to decide the revision in accordancewith law as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of two monthsfrom the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, after affordingopportunity of hearing to all concerned and pass a well reasoned and speakingorder.
With the aforesaid, the petition stands disposed of.
(S. A. DHARMADHIKARI)JUDGE Vatan