High CourtsSingle Bench(2022) 02 MP CK 0164

M/S Netra Enterprises vs State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 24 February 2022

HON’BLE JUDGES
Vijay Kumar Shukla, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No. 4463 Of 2022

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 313 words

Vijay Kumar Shukla, J

The petitioner had applied for allotment of Industrial plot for establishing Steel Fabrication Manufacturing Industry.

According to the petitioner, the said plot No.3-A Survey no.26 was allotted to him by executing lease deed dated 08.07.2011 but the possession of the land was not handed over to him by the competent authority as there was a illegal encroachment by certain persons, therefore, Tehsildar had initiated proceedings under section 250 of the MP Land Revenue Code but no action was taken so far.

The petitioner filed the writ petition no.5658/2017, in which the statement was made on behalf of the state that the lease holding plot has been handed over to the petitioner on 19.06.2019. In view of the aforesaid, the writ petition was decided.

It is submitted that the department has refused to sanction the lay out on the ground that the said plot in question has fallen in the Indore-Khandwa Highway project and therefore, it is not possible to sanction the same. Under this circumstance, the petitioner had made an application to the respondent no.5 for allotment of alternative land in lieu of the Industrial land allotted to him and the said application is pending before the respondent no.5.

Learned counsel for the respondent/state submits that the application of the petitioner shall be considered and decided by the respondent no.5 in accordance with the law within the time bound period.

In view of the aforesaid submission, the present petition is disposed off with a direction to the respondent no.5 to consider and decide the application of the petitioner for allotment of alternative land in accordance with law within the period of two months from the date of communication of the order.

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.

With the aforesaid, the present writ petition stands disposed off.