DAMODAR PRASAD Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) INVOKING the extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court of petitioner seeks a writ of certiorari for quashment of the impugned orders contained in Annexures 8 and 9 and further for quashing of the proceeding of the revenue appeal No. 35/89-90 pending before the respondent No. 2 namely Sub-Divisional Officer, Bareli.

(2.) THE facts as have been unfolded arc that the petitioners, resident of village Deori Distt. Raisen, were permitted by the Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Deori to construct the house in Abadi land situated at village Deori. The said permission was taken in the month of September, 1994. On the basis of the aforesaid permission the huts were constructed by the petitioners and subsequently the Patta was granted to them on 10-5-88 and 10-3-89 respectively by the concerned Tahsildar in consultation with the Sarpanch under Gramin Avas Yojna. The said certificates have been brought on record as Annexures P-3 and P-4. It is stated in the writ petition that the lands given to the petitioners is situated in Khasra No. 108/2, Village Deori Marked as Plot No. 1 and Plot No. 2. After being so allotted the aforesaid plots the petitioners started construction of small houses. At that juncture some of the villagers raised objections on the construction and made a complaint before the SDO alleging that the Pattas were given in an illegal manner. The SDO made an enquiry and found that the complaint was baseless and the Paitas allotted in favour of the petitioners are valid. This order was passed by the SDO on 16-10-89 vide Annexure P-5.

(3.) FEELING aggrieved by this order the respondent No. 3 preferred an appeal and in appeal the appellate authority came to hold that a Patta was granted in an illegal manner and accordingly cancelled the same. Being dissatisfied with the aforesaid order, the petitioners filed appeal before the Additional Commissioner, Bhopal who allowed the case and remanded the matter to respondent No. 2. The respondent No. 2 thereafter, in appeal No. 35/89-90 on 6-2-95 held that Pattas granted to the petitioners are valid and accordingly dismissed the appeal. No second appeal was preferred and the matter was put to rest.