The Madhya Pradesh High Court has restored for hearing a writ petition on an application filed by the State government related to certain land area of one Sita Devi was declared surplus on 17.09.1981 under the proceeding of Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 and possession was also taken in Bhopal.
The Deputy Advocate General appearing for the State government submitted that a mischief has been played by somebody in the present matter as the Advocate General Office has never filed any application for withdrawal of the said petition as they are contesting it merits for the last so many years.
The deputy advocate general further pointed out to the court that the affidavit filed along with the interim application was also not filed by the concerned Government Advocate, the court order of August 3, 2023 said.
In the present case, land of one Sita Devi was declared surplus on 17.09.1981 under the proceeding of Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 and possession was also taken, the court order said.
In the year 2000, Sita Devi preferred a revision under Section 34 of the Act of 1976, which was rejected on 12.02.2000, the court order said.
Thereafter number of litigation ensued between the parties and ultimately the matter landed up before the Board of Revenue, wherein vide order dated 18.07.2012, the order passed by the Collector, Bhopal was set aside, which resulted in filing of the present writ petition, the court order said.
This matter came up for hearing on 25.01.2023, when one advocate prayed for withdrawal of the same in view of the application I.A. No.1128/2023 on record, and the same was allowed, the court order said.
In view of the submission made by the deputy advocate general, it appears that the application I.A. 1128/2023 and accompanying affidavit is forged and fraud committed to get the writ petition withdrawn. It is clear that by withdrawal of this writ petition the ultimate beneficiary will be the private respondents, the court order said.
In view of such facts and circumstances, a proper inquiry is required to be done, the court order said.
However, as learned Deputy Advocate General has pointed out that the inquiry has already been initiated by Shri Prashant Singh, Advocate General himself, who is monitoring the entire inquiry, this Court, for the time being, refrains from giving any direction for a parallel inquiry, the court order said.
However it is expected that Shri Prashant Singh, Advocate General will submit a report of that inquiry in a seal cover before this Court, the court order said.
Accordingly, I.A. No.11368/2023 is allowed and the order dated 25.01.2023 is hereby recalled. The petition is restored to its original number, the court order said.
