Shriniwas And Others vs State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others

Amit Seth, J

Heard on the question of admission.

The petitioners have filed the instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, claiming for the following reliefs:-

"1. That, respondent no.3 be directed to get executed sale deed in compliance of order of Civil Court.

That, respondent no.2 Collector District Sheopur may kindly be directed to decide the issue of permission within 30 days.

That, any other relief including the cost of petition be given."

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that pursuant to a decree dated 01.12.2017 passed by the appellate Court in Civil Case No.RCS-A/9/2017, the Executing Court has referred the matter to the Registration Officer for registration of the sale deed in favour of the petitioners but the Deputy Registrar, Vijaypur, District Sheopur, vide communication dated 12.08.2024, had informed the Executing Court that, in view of bar contained under subsection 7- b of Section 165 of the Madhya pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959, the land being the Patta land the registration of the sale deed is barred as there is entry in the revenue records (to the effect the land being not transferable).

Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that, in view of the aforesaid communication dated 12.08.2024 issued by the Sub-Registrar, Vijaypur, District Sheopur, the Executing Court, vide communications dated 17.10.2024 and 30.04.2025, had referred the matter to the Collector and called upon the Collector to submit its report either granting permission for registration or, in the event of non-granting permission report in the said regard be submitted.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, inspite of there-being two communications issued by the learned Executing Court, the Collector is sitting tight over the matter. Consequently, the petitioners have also moved a representation before the Collector to comply with the communications issued by the Executing Court, but no action has been taken thereon. Accordingly, the direction is sought by the petitioners before the Collector, Sheopur to decide the representation (Annexure P/1) submitted by the them in the said regard.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the writ petition contending that once the Executing Court is seized of the matter, the petitioners cannot be permitted to invoke writ jurisdiction parallelly and seek a direction to the Collector to decide their representation on the matter which is pending consideration before the Executing Court. He further submits that even otherwise, no direction can be issued to the Collector to decide the representation seeking registration of the sale deed in respect of Government Patta land in terms of Section 165 (7-b) of the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959.

No other point is pressed by the learned counsel for the parties.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

This Court finds much force in the objection advanced on behalf of the learned counsel for the State that once the learned Executing Court is seized of the matter, the petitioners cannot be permitted parallel invocation of writ jurisdiction, under the garb of a direction to the Collector to decide their representation.

In view of the above, admission to the instant writ petition is declined.

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners seeks leave of this Court to approach the learned Executing Court for ventilation of their grievance.

Needless to observe that no leave in the said regard is required. The petitioners are free to avail such remedies as may be permissible in law, and it is for the concerned authority/court to decide the same in accordance with law.

With the aforesaid, the present petition stands disposed of. Certified copy as per rules.