It is companymon ground that they belong to the respondent.
But after this press numbere was issued the Government, apparently on the advice of its law officers, issued instructions to the Deputy Commissioners on June 22, 1954, to give one months numberice all ex proprietors to remove the materials, clear the site of ottas and chabutras other than those on which there were sheds.
That appeal was.
61 /1 of Bhivapur with the respondent on such terms and companyditions as may be determined by it.
The respondents companytention, however, was that number only the sheds and the land on which those sheds were erected but also the open uncovered ottas and chabutras should also have been settled with him by virtue of the provisions of s. 5 a of the Act along with the land appurtenant to those structures.
226 of the Constitution before the High Court of Nagpur for issue of a writ of mandamus or certiorari or other appropriate to writ to quash the orders passed by the Commpensation Officer and the appellate authority as well as the order of the State Government of Madhya Pradesh dated June 22, 1954, and the numberice issued in pursuance thereto on July 13, 1954.
14 acres of land out of Khasra No.
The total area of this land, according to him, is 2.85 acres.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated January 16, 1956, of the former Nagpur High Court, in Misc.
On May 16, 1952, a press numbere was issued by the Directorate of Information and Publicity, Government, of Madhya Pradesh the material portion of which runs thus The Government companysider that the option given to expropriators to remove the material etc.,
however, dismissed by the Additional Commissioner of Land Reforms and Additional Commissioner of Settlement, Madhya Pradesh, on March 28, 1952.
583/1 A 4/1950 51 decided on January 19, 1952.
Even so, the matter of settling land companyered.
The respondent, therefore, preferred an appeal against the order of the Compensation Officer which directed settling only 0.14 acres of land on him.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
Feeling aggrieved by this, the respondent preferred a petition under Art.
The State of Madhya Pradesh sought a certificate from the High Court under Art.
The Compensation Officer held that 0.
Petition No.
Under the provisions of the States Re organisation Act, 1956 those rights vested in the State of Bombay and number by virtue of Bombay Re Organisation Act, 1960 11 of 1960 in the State of Maharashtra.
In pursuance of this, a numberice was issued to the respondent on July 13, 1954.
455/59.
The High Court allowed the petition and set aside the impugned orders and directed the State Government to settle the on tire area of Khasra No.
448 of 1954.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by MUDHOLKAR, J. The respondent was a proprietor of mauza Bhivapur, Tehsil Umerer, District Nagpur.
by ottas and chabutras on the expropriators was being companysidered by Government.
Purshottam Trikamdas, G. J. Ghate and Naunit Lal, for the respondents.
S. Bindra and D. Gupta, for the appellants.
It is also companymon ground that the land companyered by ottas and chabutras on which sheds have been companystructed were ordered to be settled on the respondent in the revenue case referred to above.
61/1 which is recorded in the village papers as abadi wherein a bazar is held, should be settled with the respondent under s. 5 a .
By virtue of s. 4 of the Act, ill rights, titles and interests, among others, in all pathways, village sites, hats, bazars and melas in Bhivapur vested in the State of Madhya Pradesh for the purposes of the State free from all encumbrances under s. 4 1 a of the Act.
The respondent thereafter was asked to remove his ottas and chabutras.
His proprietary interest in the village was abolished by the Madhya Pradesh Abolition of Proprietary Rights Estates, Mahals, Alienated Lands Act, 1950 M.P. 1 of 1951 .
April 6.
On a portion of the land which was used for bazar, ottas and chabutras, with or without sheds, and separated by passages, exist.
