CHAMPABAI Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners are seeking the relief of issuance of a writ of Certiorari as well as writ of Mandamus for setting aside the order of the Competent Authority dated 17-07-1989 (Annexure-H) by which the petitioners' application for grant of exemption from Urban Land Ceiling was rejected and the order passed by the Additional Commissioner, Ujjain dated 14-08-1990 (Annexure-I) dismissing the appeal and the Notification dated 03-06-1987 declaring the land surplus.

(2.) IN short the case of the petitioners is that the petitioners are the Bhoomiswami of land Survey No. 44 area 1. 39 hectares and Survey No. 58 having area of 0. 878 hectares situated at Village Khilchipur, Tehsil Ghatia, District Ujjain. The aforesaid lands are recorded in the names of the petitioners in the revenue record and the petitioner No. 2 is having possession over the lands. It is the agricultural land. The certified copy of the Panchsala Khasra for the years 1986-87 and 1987-88 are also filed and in Column No. 12 of the Khasra it is mentioned that the land is reserved for Simhastha Mela. The contention of the petitioners in the petition is that due to the Simhastha Mela which is being organised after every 12 years, the area of the city of Ujjain is extended upto the village Khilchipur though it is situated at a long distance from Ujjain and in the master plan of Ujjain the village Khilchipur and the land bearing Survey Nos. 44 and 58 have been included in the Mela Area in the Master Plan. The Master Plan has also been approved by the Town and Country Planning Department. Therefore, the survey numbers referred in the petition comes within the reserved area for Simhastha Mela. In view of the aforesaid factual position, the aforesaid two survey numbers do not fall within the category of open land as prescribed under the Urban Land Ceiling Act and because of the inclusion of the area into the Mela Area, the petitioners can neither make any construction over the said land nor its land use can be changed. The land can only be used for agricultural purposes as the land is reserved for the Mela Area. The case of the petitioner is that by Circular dated 18-7-1984 the State Government has directed the competent authority not to grant any permission for construction over such land which are reserved. Therefore, the land cannot be treated as an open land.

(3.) IT is also the case of the petitioners that in another case of Bapusingh son of Onkarji, Case No. 153/6/1/77-78 by order dated 05-12-1985, the competent authority has already treated the land of village Khilchipur as a reserved land under the Master Plan for Simhastha Mela and has also declared the same as a non-open land for the purpose of Urban Land Ceiling Act. Therefore, two different and discriminatory orders regarding the land of the same village Khilchipur cannot be passed.