MANTRI MANTARI AND CO Vs. STATE OF MP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ appeal has been filed against the order dated 15-3-2007 of the learned Single Judge passed in Writ Petition No. 1642/2007 in relation to the action taken by the respondents against the appellant under the M. P. Lok Parisar (Bedakhali) Adhiniyam, 1974, allegedly after cancellation of the plots No. 28 and 29, which were alloted to the appellant by the District Trade and Industries Center, Indore. The said petition was filed assailing the order of the Commissioner, Indore Division, declining to grant stay during the pendency of the appeal. The learned Single Judge, while disposing of the petition, has granted liberty to the petitioner to renew his prayer for interim relief before the appellate authority (Commissioner, Indore Division) with direction to the appellate authority that it shall consider the application and decide the same on merit by a reasoned order expeditiously.

(2.) THE grievance of the appellant is that on account of the refusal of the commissioner to grant stay during pendency of the appeal before him against the order of the Competent Authority under the said Adhiniyam, the proceedings before the Commissioner have virtually become infructuous and in the meanwhile, the respondents have obtained possession from the appellant and the respondents are taking expeditious steps to allot the said plots to the intervenor niiesh Jain. The learned counsel for the appellant has also submitted that since in the lease deed the dispute was to be referred to the named arbitrator, namely the commissioner, the proceedings initiated under the provisions of the Bedakhali adhiniyam were null and void and the order passed by the Competent Authority, a nullity.

(3.) LEARNED Additional Advocate General has pointed out that insofar as the stipulation with regard to arbitration is concerned, the appellant has not agitated the same either before the Competent Authority or before the appellate authority (Commissioner) and, therefore, the appellant is trying to seek relief on the basis of extraneous material, in the present case we are not required to deal with the contention that in the case of the arbitration clause in the agreement, whether the proceedings under the Bedakhali Adhiniyam are a nullity. The appeal of the appellant is pending before the Commissioner and the appellant will be at liberty to raise all legal grounds in the said appeal. The only aspect that concerns us is as to whether stay should be granted during the pendency of the appeal.