ROHINI PRSAD PATEL Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since record of the ceiling case is available and learned counsel for the parties are ready to argue the matter, therefore, it is heard finally.

(2.) By the instant petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is seeking following relief:-

(3.) Laconically, the facts leading to filing the instant petition are that the petitioner was bhoomi-swami of the agricultural land bearing old Khasra No.95, new Khasra No.23 of area 0.49 hectare and new Khasra No.25 of area 0.94 hectare total area 1.43 hectare situated at Mauja Chaukital, Tahsil and District Jabalpur. As per the petitioner, he is still in possession over the said land. The petitioner submitted a statement under Section 6 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (for brevity the 'Act, 1976') before the Competent Authority as the Authority declared 32491.22 square meter land as surplus. Thereafter, in a ceiling case registered as case No.647/A-90 (B-9)/1981-82, a draft statement was issued as per the provisions of Section 8(1) of the Act, 1976 inviting objections. The petitioner submitted his objection on 08.07.1985 then finally on 20.07.1989, the Competent Authority passed an order considering the objection raised by the petitioner and declared 32491.22 square meter land as surplus and directed that notice be issued under Section 9 of the Act, 1976 then on 22.07.1989, notice of Section 9 was issued. Notice dated 23.10.1993 issued under Section 10(5) of the Act, 1976 is also available on record addressed to the petitioner to handover the possession of the land in question within 30 days otherwise ex-parte possession would be taken over. Letter related to possession over the land is also available on record but the same is undated.