VICHITRA SINGH TOMAR Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS matter is analogously heard with Writ Petition No.424/2003 and Writ Petition No.487/2003. Learned counsel submits that the legal questions involved in these matters are identical and, therefore, these matters may be heard analogously and decided by common order. I do so accordingly.

(2.) THE facts are taken from Writ Petition No.294/2003. The land in question was originally owned by one Machal Singh whose name was mentioned as "Bhumiswami" in the revenue records. The revenue records Annexure P/4, dated 3/3/1964 make it clear that Machal Singh is the originally Bhumiswami. On 22/03/1966, lay-out plan of the land in question was sanctioned by Chief Town Planner. On 9/1/1968, the land was sold to Brij Biharilal as per sanctioned lay-out plan and possession was handed over. The name of Brij Biharilal was mutated in revenue record vide Annexure P/7. Subsequently on 12/01/1968, Brij Biharilal sold Plot Nos. 4 and 5 out of the aforesaid land to one Harshwardhan Shankar Dravid and handed over possession to him vide Annexure P/6. On 9/9/1976, the date on which Urban Land Ceiling and Regulation. Act, 1976 came into force in the State of Madhya Pradesh, said Shri Dravid was the owner and holder of the land in question. On 19/02/1981, the petitioner obtained non- encumbrances certificate from Tahsildar for the said land before purchase. This fact is admitted by the respondents in their return. On 28/04/1981, Harshwardhan Shankar Dravid sold the plots to the petitioner and handed over its possession vide Annexure P/18. The petitioner, then obtained building construction permission from competent authority and constructed a house on the said land. The petitioner paid the property tax in accordance with law before the competent authority. It appears that the respondent issued notice to Machal Singh under the provisions of 1976 Act and obtained his reply. On 28/04/19990, the Upper Collector passed draft statement declaring the land in Survey Nos. 310/1 and 310/2 to be of Machal Singh. On 19/06/1990 a final statement under the said Act was passed by invoking Section 9 of the said Act. On 17/07/1990, a notification under Section 101. of 1976 Act [ Anexure P/22] was issued. Another notification under Section 10 2. of 1976 Act Annexure P/21. was issued on 3/7/1992. The petitioner gave his house on rent to Urja Vikas Nigam which in turn vacated the said accommodation on 20/10/1995 Annexure P/14.. The petitioner then constructed second storey in the said house on 20/09/1996. It is the case of the petitioner that he is in continuous possession of the house and it was not taken over by the respondents at any point of time. Specific pleadings are made in this regard in the body of writ petition. Later on, when the petitioner came to know that the impugned order is passed, he preferred present writ petition i. e. Writ Petition No.294/2003 and assailed the same.

(3.) SHRI Harish Dixit, learned counsel has advanced two-fold submissions as under:-