SUMAN KATARIA Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ appeal under Section 2(1) of the Madhya Pradesh Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyaypeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 24.03.2021 whereby W.P. No. 5674/2021 filed by the appellant has been dismissed.

(2.) The facts in nutshell are that the appellant was granted temporary lease for an area of 40 ft. X 40 ft. i.e. 1600 sq.ft. at Khasra No. 86/3 in Village Amanpur, Tehsil and District Jabalpur for the purpose of setting up the petrol pump. The leased land was a nazul land.

(3.) The lease was renewed from time to time and last renewal of the temporary lease was upto 31.03.1998. On 27.04.2005, the Building Officer of the Municipal Corporation had given notice to the appellant for removal of petrol pump as the land was coming in the way of broadening of the road. The appellant had filed reply to the notice. The appellant was running the petrol pump of the Indian Oil Corporation, which had filed W.P. No. 16284/2005, wherein the interim protection was granted. By order dated 22.06.2006, Collector had rejected the application for grant of permanent lease in favour of Indian Oil Corporation and W.P. No. 7953/2010 was filed. The writ petitions remain pending and meanwhile the plan relating to broadening of the road also changed and on 18.12.2020, the Municipal Authorities had filed an affidavit in the pending writ petitions stating that the land is not required for the purpose of broadening of the road. By order dated 13.01.2021, both the writ petitions were disposed of taking note of the stand of the respondents that the plan for widening of the road was given up, therefore, the action impugned in those petitions did not survive. This Court had also taken note of the fact that by order dated 22.06.2006, the appellant's application for permanent lease was rejected mainly on the ground that the land was required for the purpose of widening of the road and for developing the crossing but on account of the subsequent development, the said reason did not survive, hence this Court had set aside the order dated 22.06.2006 and directed the Collector Jabalpur to take a fresh decision in accordance with law after giving an opportunity of hearing to all the concerned parties.