Madhya Pradesh High CourtJain Enterprises Guna Through Owner ... vs Manager Guna on 7 August, 2023Author:Rohit AryaBench:Rohit Arya,Deepak Kumar Agarwal1\n                          IN    THE    HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH\n                                             AT GWALIOR\n                                                  BEFORE\n                                     HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ROHIT ARYA\n                                                     &\n                               HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL\n                                           ON THE 7 th OF AUGUST, 2023\n                                        WRIT PETITION No. 21496 of 2022\n\n                         BETWEEN:-\n                         SHADORA BROTHERS THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR\n                         SANTOSH JAIN S/O SHRI RATANCHAND JAIN R/O BADA\n                         JAIN MANDIR ROAD CHAUDHARY MOHALLA GUNA\n                         (MADHYA PRADESH)\n\n                                                                             .....PETITIONER\n                         (BY SHRI S.K. SHRIVASTAVA- ADVOCATE)\n\n                         AND\n                         1.    GUNA MARKETING COOPERATIVE SOCIETY\n                               GUNA MANAGER GUNA (MADHYA PRADESH)\n\n                         2.    PRESIDENT MARKETING COOPERATIVE SOCIETY\n                               GUNA GUNA (MADHYA PRADESH)\n\n                         3.    SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER CUM COMPETENT\n                               AUTHORITY UNDER LOK PARISAR BEDAKHALI\n                               ADHINIYAM GUNA GUNA (MADHYA PRADESH)\n\n                         4.    COLLECTOR GUNA (MADHYA PRADESH)\n\n                                                                           .....RESPONDENTS\n                         (BY SHRI PURSHOTTAM SHARMA - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENTS NO. 1\n                         AND 2 AND SHRI M.P.S. RAGHUVANSHI - ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE\n                         GENERAL FOR RESPONDENT NO.3 AND 4/STATE)\n\n                                         MISC. PETITION No. 4425 of 2022\n\n                         BETWEEN:-\n                         JAIN   ENTERPRISES   GUNA THROUGH OWNER\n                         RAJENDRA KUMAR JAIN S/O SHRI KEWAL CHAND\n                         JAIN, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCCUPATION: OWNER\nSignature Not Verified\nSigned by: YOGENDRA\nOJHA\nSigning time: 8/8/2023\n6:18:54 PM\n                                                   2\n                         JAIN ENTERPRISES GUNA R/O NEAR JAIN TEMPLE\n                         CHAUDHARY MOHALLA TEHSIL AND DISTRICT GUNA\n                         (MADHYA PRADESH)\n\n                                                                                       .....PETITIONER\n                         (BY SHRI RAJIV JAIN- ADVOCATE)\n\n                         AND\n                         1.    MANAGER GUNA MARKETING CO OPERATIVE\n                               SOCIETY LTD STATION ROAD GUNA (MADHYA\n                               PRADESH)\n\n                         2.    PRESIDENT GUNA MARKETING CO OPERATIVE\n                               SOCIETY LIMITED STATION ROAD (MADHYA\n                               PRADESH)\n\n                         3.    COLLECTOR GUNA (MADHYA PRADESH)\n\n                         4.    THE   SDO REVENUE            DEPARTMENT GUNA\n                               (MADHYA PRADESH)\n\n                                                                                    .....RESPONDENTS\n                         (BY SHRI PURSHOTTAM SHARMA - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENTS NO. 1\n                         AND 2 AND SHRI M.P.S. RAGHUVANSHI - ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE\n                         GENERAL FOR RESPONDENT NO.3 AND 4/STATE )\n\n                               These petitions coming on for admission this day, JUSTICE ROHIT\n                         ARYA passed the following common:\n                                                            ORDERThis order shall govern disposal of Writ Petition No. 21496/2022 and\n                         Miscellaneous Petition No. 4425/2022.Petitioner, a sub-lessee, is before this Court taking exception to the\n                         impugned order dated 18.08.2022 passed by the Collector, Guna.Factual matrix relevant for disposal of both the petitions is in narrow\n                         compass. Admittedly, the premises in question is a godown constructed by\n                         respondents No. 1 and 2 over the government land. The said land was given on\n                         lease to respondent No. 1 and 2 by respondent No. 4 for its own use vide lease-\n                         deed dated 11.03.1980. However, respondents No. 1 and 2 constructedSignature Not VerifiedSigned by: YOGENDRAOJHASigning time: 8/8/20236:18:54 PM3godown for unauthorizedly letting out the same to the petitioner on rent on\n                         12.04.2002.It appears that the respondents No. 1 and 2 filed an application under\n                         Section 4 of Madhya Pradesh Lok Parisar (Bedakhali) Adhiniyam, 1974\n                         (hereinafter referred as "the Act") calling upon the petitioner to vacate the\n                         premises. The reply thereto was filed vide Annexure P/5 on 24.01.2019. The\n                         Sub Divisional Officer/respondent No.3 has narrated the complete pleadings in\n                         it's communication dated 23.03.2021 (Anneuxre P/2) addressed to the Collector\n                         wherein it was pointed out that premises in question falls within the definition of\n                         unauthorized occupation as defined under Section 2(e) of the Act inasmuch as\n                         the land in question was leased out to respondents No. 1 and 2 by the Collector\n                         for its own use but the same (godown) has unauthorizedly been let out to the\n                         petitioner in violation of the aforesaid lease dated 11.03.1980. Therefore, it was\n                         requested that the Collector may take decision for cancellation of lease granted\n                         in favour of respondents No. 1 and 2. It further appears that respondents No. 1\n                         and 2 approached the Collector against the recommendation purportedly under\n                         Section 9 of the Act. The Collector has passed impugned order dated\n                         18.08.2022. The Collector did not find any error in the recommendation made\n                         by the Sub-Divisional Officer. The original lease in favour of respondents No.1\n                         and 2 was a government lease for it's own use but respondents No. 1 and 2\n\n                         instead has sublet the land (godown) to the petitioner unauthorizedly and\n                         illegally. In such circumstances, the act of respondents No. 1 and 2 was found\n                         to be patently illegal. Consequently, it has been ordered that the unauthorized\n                         occupant be evicted.Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the entire proceedings\n                         initiated before the Sub-Divisional Officer and also before the Collector are notSignature Not VerifiedSigned by: YOGENDRAOJHASigning time: 8/8/20236:18:54 PM4in-conformity with the provisions contained under the Act. According to him,\n                         the Sub-Divisional Officer was the Competent Authority to initiate proceedings\n                         and pass the order of eviction as provided under Section 5 of the Act against\n                         which the appeal is provided under Section 9 of the Act. Therefore, the\n                         impugned order passed by the Collector deserves to be set-aside.Per contra, Shri Raghuvanshi, learned Additional Advocate General\n                         submits that the public premises was given on lease to the Cooperative Society\n                         for the purpose specified in the lease document with no provision of granting\n                         sublease by the lessee in favour of third person. The original lessee i.e.\n                         respondents No. 1 and 2 have acted in violation of terms and conditions of the\n                         lease. As such the occupation of the petitioner over the godown constructed on\n                         such land falls within the scope of unauthorized occupation on a public\n                         premises.The purpose of the Madhya Pradesh Lok Parisar (Bedakhali) Adhiniyam,\n                         1974 is to ensure that the person in occupation found to be in unauthorized\n                         occupation is afforded an opportunity before an order of eviction is passed\n                         against him. The factual matrix in hand suggests that the petitioner has been\n                         afforded due opportunity through notice and time to file reply at any stage. If\n                         the petitioner is an unauthorized occupant, it is liable for eviction as rightly held\n                         by the Collector. Mere procedural lapse as pointed out by the petitioner in no\n                         way has caused any prejudice to the petitioner regard being had to the facts in\n                         hand and the object of the Act. With the aforesaid, learned Additional Advocate\n                         General for State prays for dismissal of both the petitions.Learned counsel for the respondents No.1 and 2 states that the lease\n                         premises was sublet to the petitioner to obtain the funds as it was difficult forSignature Not VerifiedSigned by: YOGENDRAOJHASigning time: 8/8/20236:18:54 PM5the society to meet out the establishment cost during Covid-19 period,\n                         therefore, no exception can be taken in the matter of sublease of the premises\n                         given to the petitioner.Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, we are of the view that\n                         respondents No. 1 and 2 have acted unauthorizedly and illegally while subletting\n                         the premises to the petitioner for its own gains without permission or consent of\n                         respondents No. 3 and 4. Therefore, Shri Raghuvanshi rightly contended that\n                         the petitioner falls within the scope of unauthorized occupation as defined under\n                         Section 2(g) of the Act. For ready reference, clause 2(g) of the Act is quoted\n                         blow:-....Under such circumstances, the petitioner had an opportunity to contest\n                         the proceedings initiated against him for eviction and since a well reasoned\n                         order is passed, we are of the view that there is hardly any scope to contend\n                         that the petitioner is denied any right whatsoever to justify it's continuance in the\n                         premises by virtue of sublease. We are of the view that the act of respondent\n                         No. 1 and 2 subletting the government premises to the petitioner was illegal per\n                         se, therefore, no exception can be taken to the order of eviction of unauthroized\n                         occupant on public premises.At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner prays for time to vacate\n                         the premises and hand over the possession to the respondents No. 3 and 4.Shri Raghuvanshi, opposes the prayer with submission that such person\n                         who is in unauthorized occupation should not deserve any equitable\n                         consideration.Without commenting upon the opposition made, this Court hereby grants\n                         three months' time to vacate the premises and hand over it's vacate possessionSignature Not VerifiedSigned by: YOGENDRAOJHASigning time: 8/8/20236:18:54 PM6to respondent No. 3 and 4, failure thereof, shall entitle respondent No. 3 and 4\n                         to take forceful possession.With the aforesaid, both the petition stands disposed of.(ROHIT ARYA)                                 (DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL)\n                               JUDGE                                              JUDGE\n                         ojhaSignature Not VerifiedSigned by: YOGENDRAOJHASigning time: 8/8/20236:18:54 PM