High CourtsDivision Bench(2025) 12 MP CK 1955

Satyanaryan Late Shri Dhulmal Daga Through Power Of Attorney Holder Shivshankar And Others vs State Of M.P. And Others

Madhya Pradesh High Court, Indore Bench · Decided on 8 December 2025

HON’BLE JUDGES
Vijay Kumar Shukla, J · Binod Kumar Dwivedi, J
CASE NUMBER
Writ Appeal No. 3517 Of 2025

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

16 paragraphs · 597 words

Today the matter was mentioned stating that the Corporation is going to demolish the structure of the petitioner.

The present intra Court Appeal is filed against the order passed by the learned Single Judge whereby the writ petition of the Petitioner as well as other connected writ petitions have been disposed of with the following directions:-

"(i) the respondent/Municipal Corporation shall firstly determine the central line of the road in front of the houses of the petitioners,

(ii) thereafter, individual notices shall be issued to the petitioners under Section 305 of Municipal Corporation Act, 1956, fixing the date and time when the inspection/demarcation would be done,

(iii) on that day and time, the road in front of properties of the petitioners shall be measured in their presence and a report in that regard would be prepared,

(iv) for the purpose of demarcation, the respondent Corporation shall constitute a team which would comprise its senior officers as well as an officer of the Town and Country Planning Department, Dewas. The team may also include such officers as would be required for the purpose of measurement and / or demarcation,

(v) after the demarcation having been done, as per the report, the petitioners shall be afforded opportunity of hearing and to file reply and thereafter, final order in the matter shall be passed,

(vi)the respondents shall on a case-to-case basis determine and fix the width of the road in front of the properties of the petitioners i.e 12 meters or 15 meters as provided under the Devas Plan, 1931 taking into consideration the documents of the petitioners as may be produced by them,

(vii) in case any of the petitioners produce any document in which there is any determination of the width of the road then the said document shall be given effect to otherwise, the Corporation shall be free to fix the width of the road as per its discretion,

(viii) the Corporation shall not deny monetary compensation to the petitioners by adopting Note (1) of Rule 61 of MP Bhumi Vikas Rules, 2012 without the owner voluntarily surrendering his plot /land or part of it for public purpose,

(ix) After the process of demarcation and passing of final order and valuation is completed, the Corporation shall be free to take possession of the property immediately without waiting for evaluation and payment of monetary compensation so that the progress in public work of widening of road is not hampered,

(x) the aforesaid shall be followed by paying adequate compensation in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible and in any case within a period of 6 months."

Counsel for the appellant argued that the respondent-Corporation is proceeding for demolishing the structure of the appellant without complying with the direction (i) whereby the Corporation has been directed to first determine the central line of the road in front of the house of the appellant.

Counsel for the respondent-Corporation has drawn attention of this Court to the notice dated 06.05.2025 filed at page 90.

Upon perusal of the said notice, it is clear that the notice has been issued to the appellant for demarcation and for determining the central line of the road at 10:30 at 08.12.2025. Thus, he argued that the apprehension of the appellant that the structure in question shall be demolished without following the direction (i) is totally misconceived. He further submits that the Corporation will proceed as per the directions passed by the learned Single Judge.

In view of the statement made by counsel for the respondent-Corporation, we adjourn the hearing of this case to 16.12.2025.