P. J. MATHEW Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AS common questions are involved in all these petitions, they are being disposed of by this common order.

(2.) CHALLENGE in these petitions are made to the action of the State Government proposing to recover certain amounts from the petitioners treating them to be as encroachers, by the impugned action and notices, settlement amount and lease rent is being recovered. In WP No. 1061/05 the Coopertive Society has challenged the order Annexure P-1 dated 18.10.2004 passed by the respondents No. 2/Collector holding that the urban land proceedings is abated and acquisition proceedings stands confirmed.

(3.) SHRI R.D. Jain, learned senior counsel for petitioners pointed out that before sale of the land by the original owners, the original owners had sought permission from the State Government and it is only after permission was granted to the original owners by the Government that land was sold to the society and subsequently to the petitioners. It is stated by Shri R.D. Jain that if there is some dispute between the State and the original owners and if the land comes under the purview of Urban Land Ceiling Act, it was for the State Government to refuse permission but once permission was granted to the original owners to sell the land, action cannot be taken against the petitioners on the ground of misrepresentation or fraud committed by the original owners.