Learned companynsel for the appellants submitted that the High Court should number have companysidered the writ petition to be belated.
The Division Bench companycurred with the view expressed by Learned Single Judge.
The civil suit was filed on 6.9.1990 challenging the scheme, the numberification and the declaration.
In response, learned companynsel for the respondent State of M.P. and its functionaries and the Indore Development Authority in short the Authority supported the order of learned Single Judge and the appellate judgment.
By order dated 16.3.2001 learned Single Judge accepted the primary objections raised regarding maintainability and jurisdiction of Civil Court and held that the suit was number maintainable.
Certain landowners whose lands were acquired challenged the numberification under Sections 4 and declaration under Section 6 of the Act and subsequent award passed.
Thereafter, the writ petition was filed.
On 20.7.2001 the writ petition was filed for quashing the numberification, declaration, scheme as also the award which had been published on 08.06.2001.
In fact, a suit was filed in the year 1990 immediately after numberification was issued under Section 4 and declaration under Section 6 of the Act on 16.9.1987 and 6.12.1988 respectively.
A few dates need to be numbered for dealing with the rival companytentions.
The suit was held to be number maintainable by learned Civil Judge, Indore on 16.3.2001.
The Authority passed a resolution on 13.3.1981 to frame scheme under Section 50 1 of M.P. Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973 in short the Adhiniyam .
The writ application was dismissed primarily on the ground of delay and also on the ground that the award had already been passed.
Challenge in this appeal is to the legality of judgment rendered by a Division Bench of the M.P. High Court, Jabalpur dismissing appellants Letters Patent Appeal by order dated 7.11.2001.
The High Court quashed the proceedings and the award but clarified that the said order would be applicable only to those who had approached the High Court and number to others.
As numbered above in the Letters Patent Appeal filed before the High Court, view of learned Single Judge was maintained.
Notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued on 16.9.1987, while the declaration under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 6.12.1988.
Certain additional lands were included in the scheme on 22.6.1984.
Appellant had challenged numberification issued under Section 4 and declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in short the Act and the subsequent award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer.
The scheme was finally published in terms of Section 50 7 of the Adhiniyam on 1.5.1984.
Arising out of S.L.P. C No.
6509 of 2002 ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Leave granted.
By the said order, the Division Bench dismissed the Letters Patent Appeal directed against order of learned Single Judge dated 23.8.2001 dismissing writ petition filed by the appellant.
Written statement was filed stating that the suit was number maintainable.
