court of mp... · lucknow cantt. -226002 ~d no. ... a copy of judgment dated 28.01.11, passed by...

5
Tele Mili: 6928 Civil : 2627075 To, The Principal Director, DE, Directorate of Defence Estate, 17 Cariappa Road, LUCKNOW CANTT. -226002 ~D NO. WP NO. 32321l0/DEOIJBPI Defence Estate Office, Jabalpur Circle, Jabalpur Cantt. Dated: c6 May' 2011 Subject: Forwarding of Landmark Judgment passed in WP. No. 3232/10 Sir, A copy of judgment dated 28.01.11, passed by the High Court of M.P. in WP. No. 323211 0, filed by Shri Dwarka Prasad Verma regarding extension of Civil Area within Cantonment is enclosed herewith for information and record please. Encls : as above Copy to: ~rector General, DE, Govt. of India, Min. of Defence Ulaan Bater Marg, Delhi Cantt. - 10 Defe e Estate Officer Jabalpur Circle, Jabalpur Cantt. e S.S. Grewal) W.r.t. above along with a copy of judgment dated 28.01.11, passed by Hon 'ble High Court of MP for information please. Internal Land section Float file ~/)'~~ > \ \b~~ CANTTS SECTION DGOE - Sr.AddIDG AddlDG Dy. DG I Asstt. OG ~ Oy. Oir/Asstt. Oir SOIOS/ADEO Diary No. & Date ~ \-1 ~ l1t:t 1 )f lA

Upload: buidat

Post on 22-Mar-2018

217 views

Category:

Documents


2 download

TRANSCRIPT

Tele Mili: 6928Civil : 2627075

To,The Principal Director, DE,Directorate of Defence Estate,17 Cariappa Road,LUCKNOW CANTT. -226002

~DNO. WP NO. 32321l0/DEOIJBPIDefence Estate Office,Jabalpur Circle, Jabalpur Cantt.Dated: c6 May' 2011

Subject: Forwarding of Landmark Judgment passed in WP. No. 3232/10

Sir,

A copy of judgment dated 28.01.11, passed by the High Court of M.P. in WP. No.323211 0, filed by Shri Dwarka Prasad Verma regarding extension of Civil Area withinCantonment is enclosed herewith for information and record please.

Encls : as above

Copy to:

~rector General, DE,Govt. of India, Min. of DefenceUlaan Bater Marg,Delhi Cantt. - 10

Defe e Estate OfficerJabalpur Circle, Jabalpur Cantt.

e S.S. Grewal)

W.r.t. above along with a copy of judgment dated28.01.11, passed by Hon 'ble High Court of MPfor information please.

Internal

Land section

Float file

~/)'~~·>··\ \b~~

CANTTS SECTION

DGOE-

Sr.AddIDG

AddlDG

Dy. DG IAsstt. OG ~

Oy. Oir/Asstt. Oir

SOIOS/ADEO

Diary No. & Date ~ \-1 ~ l1t:t 1)f lA

HIGH COURT 0.£ MADHYA PRADESH AT JABA~

II MEMORANDUM /1 .

e No. QLP.A.S:..JWE3i?J.-?:.j JDlab~jpur, Date~_~ 201 O.

Top I--,;~.n ~.......~. ..l h:Q. ....oottJeD·0tDCe ""...,.....-.k OiJf;~

........~.p...F..c?J .....au: L).~.C.O' ~1;r~··

...........QQ0.trQ ..'.0:~:r. d.ff1:~b..~y?Cl

, ••••••• , ••• ~ •••• '" ro ••••••••••• I •.••.•••••••••••••• _ •••••••••••••••••••• \ •••••• c , ~ •• c •• ~ ••••••••

Sub.~ COPYaf order pass,.'d by the Hon'ble Court.

. . r· .': cV7/! !/~l) r. Please find enclosed herewith copy of o. der dated /. .

passed by the Hon'ble Court in Writ Petition No 323.,p/(r!..i ; .{ IJ!.!!::~Ytr td I/r:J.!f'1f.. v« /A.Q.L.:, ..:#..P.~ J

for your needful at your end as per order of Hon'ble Court.

u ..~\\~f~Lr

(AJAY PAWAR )DEPUTY REGISTRAR (.JlTDICIAL)

~.

Il\J 'l'lill lUGH COUHT U.l'· !'i.F. Pi<.li-JClh\L ..:.>1::1,1' ,.\'1' _v?0/:.L:I-l:~.

3-)e l....-w:-it Petition No. ~ Of ~010 (PIL).

PE~~Ol\jER'I

.:' ..~

....2~;ed ebo ut; 53 years, 5/0 121l'e Sl1ri R.C.

Boar-Cl,J'abc:lpur, Rio plot t,~o. 79/116;

v ABi-',LPU.R •

H.ESPOi.'JlJEN.:.'S :

the Secret2rjl, i':inistr)' of lJc..lE:::nCC, Govt.

(2) The Dirc.:ctor Ccnel:2J., Defence

(3) The Pr ine ir·cd. Direct ~';}:.

.'through its Chief ~):ce~tive Officer at

(5) The President, CantCJiJlI;cnt

Boa.co., Jabal pur at Ce n t orirno n t, '..1 •• :j, ..1..:f Li<.

(6) The r..x.: fence Es t <::~ co (-:1' iCe!.-

(7) 'i'he Commc no e nt: , Ann,)-' Stc:t.i !'n

,',

o

"", I.

I

I

I~,,'DATE OF THE

ORDER

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH ,,'- ~/(" ~-t ')

/ j./",/ -- -,\ - / ~

<, - _ - -f';/\' ~ '.1.-'-- ,:\,If

ORDER SHEET

CASE No 201 :

Y" '

............................................... VS , ,..."

ORDER

w. P. No. 3232 I 2010

28-01-2011

Shri A.M.Trivedi, learned senior counsel with Shri S.M,Patel,appearing for the petitioner.

Shri R.L.Gupta, learned counsel for the respondents No.1, 2, 3, 6& 7.

Shri Anoop Nair, learned counsel for the respondents NO.4 & 5.

By means of this petition under Section 226 of the

Constitution of India as public interest litigation the petitioner has

sought Issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding the

respondents, Ministry of Defence, Government of India, to extend

the civil area in Cantonment Board, Jabalpur.

We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the

parties.

It is vehemently contended that in view of Section 46 of the

Cantonments Act, 2006, the respondents are bound to Increase

,6<~:':'<;:i·;:~",., the civil area of the Cantonment Board, Jabalpur, keeping in view" . v '" """ 117 '1 ''.,.~?~r: ,.;;;;;' ", "Z~~the civil population ofthe locality. It is further submitted that wh iI"

,\~~ y~'\ Cantonment Board in this regard has already sent a proposal to

"~:j;~,.~ M ~he Central Government but till date no decision has been taken., i\ l.i (,;,U ) <-r; ',' '

• .J .:t.: t'~>';~ ..'-;':\:0- ~ - On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the

";(t~~~~~~~~ respondent No. 6 opposed the prayer and drew our attention to

the averments made in the return filed wherein it has been stated

that the respondents have already conveyed their views and net

accorded NOC (No Objection Certificate). Learned counsel further

submits that Section 46 of the Act IS not mandatory in nature

.,

""

f

HICiH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

ORDER SHEET

~;t.iI~.lr..Cqf. CASE-No 3~.3..~/ 201 R .

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties we are of

the view that the facts of this petition and the relief sought, in fact,

cannot be treated to be in public interest as no public interest is

involved in the matter specifically, in view of the allegations made

by the respondent No. 6 in their return to the effect that the

, .'"," petitioner is an encroacher who wants to get it regularised, which

,a\gations have not -been denied or controverted by the

'pe~tioner. That apart, on a perusal of S:ction 46 of the Act, onI ,

which heavy reliance has been placed by the learned counsel for..the petitioner, it is clear that it is an enabling provision and it is for

the Central Government to decide as to which area should be

declared as a civil area and whether it is to be increased, modified

or reduced and, therefore, a writ to increase the civil area as

.souqht by the petitioner cannot be issued. We, therefore, do not

find any merit in the petition. It is accordingly dismissed. ;

DATE OF THEORDER

,..

-,' -

............................................... Vs .(2)

ORDER

whereunder one can seek mandamus commanding the authorities

to extend the boundary of civil area. It is also stated in the return

that the petitioner is motivated by personal interest as the

petitioner has himself encroached upon defence land which he

now seeks to be declared as civil area and, therefore, the petition

is a personal interest litigation.

Shri Gupta, who has appeared for respondents No.1, 2, 3,

6 and 7,further submitted that after the census for the year

2010-11 the m~tter i'~fn progres.s. an~ at this stage the .petition is

premature. Besides that, the petition IS beyond the purview of thel. ,~ \

public interest litigation.

IIi Q,qJ(S.R.Alam\