Sanju Yadav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:48570
1 WP-17542-2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA,
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRADEEP MITTAL
th
ON THE 6 OF JULY, 2026
WRIT PETITION No. 17542 of 2023
SANJU YADAV AND OTHERS
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Sourabh Singh Thakur - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Bramhadatt Singh, Additional Advocate General for the
State.
ORDER
Per: Pradeep Mittal, J.
The petitioners have filed this PIL praying for the following
reliefs:-
"(i) A writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the
respondents no. 2 to 4 to look into the complaints /
representations (Annexure P-13 and P-14) submitted by the
petitioners and villagers of Gram Panchayat Bamana, District
Sagar (M.P) before them.
(ii) A writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the
respondents no. 2 to 4 to remove the restriction imposed on
the implementation of the Government scheme by the
respondents for the Gram Panchayat Bamana, Tehsil Banda,
District Sagar (M.P).
(iii) Any other relief/order or direction, as this Hon'ble Court
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANVENDRA
SINGH PARIHAR
Signing time: 09-07-2026
11:51:53

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:48570
2 WP-17542-2023
deems fit and proper looking to the facts and circumstance of
the case deemed fit and proper in the interest of justice may
please be awarded along with the cost of the proceedings."

2. The facts leading to the filing of this PIL are that the
petitioners are farmers and permanent residents of Village Bamana,
Gram Panchayat Bamana, Tahsil Banda, District Sagar (M.P.).
3. That, the petitioners came to know that Government funds for
welfare and development schemes were not being released to Gram
Panchayat Bamana, resulting in non-execution of essential public works
such as roads, drainage, public toilets, and other civic amenities.
4. That, due to the construction of the Pagra Dam under the
Pancham Nagar Project, part of Village Bamana was submerged.
Although compensation was paid to certain affected persons,
rehabilitation of all eligible families remains incomplete.
5. That, despite regular elections being conducted for the Gram
Panchayat, Legislative Assembly, and Parliament, and Government
institutions such as the Middle School, Anganwadi Centre, and Fair
Price Shop functioning in the village, the respondents have continued the
restrictions, depriving the villagers of basic development works and
welfare schemes.
6. That, the Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, the
Minister for Panchayat and Rural Development, and the villagers
themselves have repeatedly recommended and requested removal of the
restrictions. However, no effective action has been taken. It is pleaded
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANVENDRA
SINGH PARIHAR
Signing time: 09-07-2026
11:51:53

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:48570
3 WP-17542-2023
that the petitioners have obtained the relevant information from official

records and the respondent authorities.
7. That, due to the continued restrictions imposed by the
respondents, the residents of Gram Panchayat Bamana have been
deprived of Government welfare schemes, basic civic amenities, and
developmental activities, causing substantial hardship.
8. That, the petitioners and other villagers have submitted
several representations requesting removal of the restrictions and
implementation of development works, but no effective action has been
taken. Hence, this PIL on the following grounds.
9. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that,
the respondents have acted arbitrarily and failed to provide basic civic
amenities and developmental benefits to the residents of Gram
Panchayat Bamana.
10. That, despite repeated representations by the petitioners and
villagers, the respondents have failed to take any effective action.
11. It is further submitted that although Government institutions
such as the School, Anganwadi Centre, and Fair Price Shop are
functioning in the village, essential facilities including roads, drainage,
public toilets, and community infrastructure have not been provided.
12. That, approximately 186 families continue to reside in Gram
Panchayat Bamana and have repeatedly requested removal of the
restrictions, but their grievances remain unaddressed.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANVENDRA
SINGH PARIHAR
Signing time: 09-07-2026
11:51:53

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:48570
4 WP-17542-2023
13. That, the petitioners could not obtain any Government order

or notification authorizing the restrictions imposed on the
implementation of welfare and development schemes, indicating that
such restrictions lack legal authority.
14. Per contra, the respondents have filed reply stating that the
issues relating to rehabilitation and resettlement of Gram Panchayat
Bamana have already been adjudicated by this Court in W.P. No.
7358/2017 (PIL), which was dismissed by order dated 08.01.2019,
thereby affirming the action of the respondent authorities.
15. That, the petitioners have already received compensation
under the land acquisition award dated 26.08.2015 and have not
established any credentials to maintain the present Public Interest
Litigation on behalf of other villagers. Accordingly, they lack the
necessary locus standi.
16. That, the remaining villagers voluntarily opted for
rehabilitation and resettlement under the Government policy. After due
enquiry, the State Government sanctioned approximately Rs. 6.70 crores
for rehabilitation by order dated 15.01.2018. Consequently, the demand
for implementation of permanent development works in an area covered
by the rehabilitation policy is wholly untenable.
17. That, proceedings under Section 89 of the Madhya Pradesh
Panchayat Raj Avam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993, were initiated
against the then Sarpanch and other officials for financial irregularities in
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANVENDRA
SINGH PARIHAR
Signing time: 09-07-2026
11:51:53

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:48570
5 WP-17542-2023
execution of development works, further justifying the respondents'

actions. Accordingly, they pray for dismissal of the writ petition.
18. The petitioners in response to the reply of the respondents,
by way of rejoinder, have further contended that the respondents have
erroneously relied upon the earlier W.P. No. 7358/2017 to oppose the
present petition. The earlier writ petition was confined to the issue of
reconsideration of the State Government's proposal for rehabilitation of
the villagers affected by the Pagra Dam project, whereas the present
petition raises an entirely different grievance relating to the denial of
government welfare schemes and basic civic amenities to the residents
of Gram Panchayat Bamana despite the village continuing to function as
a revenue village with operational government institutions, including the
Gram Panchayat, schools, Anganwadi Centre, fair price shop, and the
conduct of Assembly, Parliamentary, and Panchayat elections.
19. The respondents' assertion that compensation and
rehabilitation have been provided to the affected villagers is misleading,
as only a few families have received such benefits. Approximately 186
families continue to reside in Village Bamana, with around 165 students
studying in the Government School, which lacks essential infrastructure
and basic facilities due to the restrictions imposed by the respondents on
developmental works.
20. The continued existence of the Anganwadi Centre, fair price
shop, and other public institutions clearly establishes that the village
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANVENDRA
SINGH PARIHAR
Signing time: 09-07-2026
11:51:53

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:48570
6 WP-17542-2023
remains inhabited and requires essential civic amenities. The Patwari's

report further confirms the availability of government, abadi, and private
land in the village, explaining why many residents have not opted for
rehabilitation and continue to reside in Bamana. Moreover, official
communications from the Public Works Department and the Chief
Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, demonstrate that developmental
works, including road construction, have been recommended and that
the authorities themselves have directed removal of restrictions on such
works.
21. Accordingly, it is submitted that the respondents have failed
to present the true factual position before this court. Since Village
Bamana continues to be a functioning Gram Panchayat with a
substantial resident population, the respondents are duty-bound to
implement government schemes and provide basic civic infrastructure.
The restrictions imposed on developmental activities are arbitrary and
deserve to be removed in the interest of justice.
22. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused
the pleadings as well as the material available on record.
23. It is not in dispute that the lands of the affected villagers of
Gram Panchayat Bamana were acquired for construction of the Pagra
Dam under the Pancham Nagar Project and that compensation under the
land acquisition award has already been assessed and disbursed to the
eligible landowners. The record further reveals that the State
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANVENDRA
SINGH PARIHAR
Signing time: 09-07-2026
11:51:53

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:48570
7 WP-17542-2023
Government has framed and implemented a rehabilitation and

resettlement policy, pursuant to which substantial funds have been
sanctioned for rehabilitation of the affected families. The issue relating
to rehabilitation has also been the subject matter of earlier litigation
before this Court.
24. The principal grievance of the petitioners is that despite
certain Government institutions, such as the Gram Panchayat, School,
Anganwadi Centre and Fair Price Shop, continuing to function in the
village, the respondents have not undertaken developmental works and
have withheld implementation of Government welfare schemes. In
support of their case, reliance has been placed on certain administrative
communications recommending removal of restrictions on development
works.
25. In our considered opinion, such administrative
communications are merely recommendatory in nature and do not confer
any enforceable legal right upon the petitioners. They cannot override or
dilute the statutory acquisition proceedings or the rehabilitation policy
framed by the State Government. Once the affected landowners have
been compensated and brought within the ambit of the rehabilitation
scheme, no mandamus can be issued directing the authorities to
undertake permanent developmental works in the acquired or
rehabilitation area merely because some residents continue to occupy the
village.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANVENDRA
SINGH PARIHAR
Signing time: 09-07-2026
11:51:53

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:48570
8 WP-17542-2023
26. The relief sought by the petitioners is intrinsically connected

with the consequences of the acquisition and rehabilitation process. In
the absence of any statutory provision, legal right, or arbitrariness in the
implementation of the rehabilitation policy, no case is made out for
interference in exercise of the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court
under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
27. The villagers of Bamana whose properties fall within the
submergence area of the dam have already received compensation under
the Land Acquisition Award dated 26.08.2015. Having accepted the
compensation, they have not established any legal basis to maintain the
present Public Interest Litigation (PIL) on behalf of other villagers.
Accordingly, they lack the necessary locus standi to institute or
prosecute the present petition. The remaining villagers, whose properties
are situated outside the direct submergence area but fall within the
rehabilitation zone, voluntarily opted for rehabilitation and resettlement
under the Government's Rehabilitation and Resettlement Policy. After
conducting the necessary enquiry, the State Government sanctioned
approximately Rs. 6.70 crores for their rehabilitation by order dated
15.01.2018. A list of such beneficiaries has already been placed on
record. According to the report, 179 villagers opted for the rehabilitation
scheme. Under the terms of the scheme, 80% of the compensation was
paid initially, while the remaining 20% is payable upon vacating and
handing over possession of their properties.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANVENDRA
SINGH PARIHAR
Signing time: 09-07-2026
11:51:53

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:48570
9 WP-17542-2023
28. It is submitted that not only the land directly affected by

submergence but also the adjacent land is impacted by the dam and falls
within the danger zone for human habitation. Considering the safety of
the residents, the Government formulated the rehabilitation scheme for
the entire affected area. However, despite accepting compensation,
several villagers now seek to continue residing in the village, which is
unsafe and contrary to the very purpose of the rehabilitation policy. It is
further submitted that the rehabilitation scheme applies only to the
identified 179 affected villagers. Therefore, the present Public Interest
Litigation, instituted at their instance, is not maintainable as it does not
represent the interest of the general public but only the personal interests
of a limited group of beneficiaries. It is also pertinent to note that the
Gram Panchayat has not filed any reply opposing the present petition.
29. In our considered opinion, the entire village of Bamana falls
within the rehabilitation scheme and the area affected by the dam.
Consequently, not only the submerged land but also the adjoining land is
required to be vacated in the interest of public safety. If permanent civic
amenities and developmental works continue to be provided in the
village, the affected villagers would be encouraged to remain in
occupation, thereby frustrating the implementation of the rehabilitation
scheme and creating unnecessary obstacles in vacating the area.
30. Accordingly, no direction can be issued for providing or
continuing permanent development works and civic amenities in the
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANVENDRA
SINGH PARIHAR
Signing time: 09-07-2026
11:51:53

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:48570
10 WP-17542-2023
village for the benefit of persons who have already accepted

compensation and are required to be rehabilitated elsewhere. After
accepting compensation under the rehabilitation scheme, the villagers
have no legal right to continue in possession of their properties or to
occupy adjoining Government land situated near the dam. The
contention that sufficient land is available within Bamana village for
resettlement instead of relocating the villagers to Bhikampur is without
merit. The affected villagers have declined to relocate to the
rehabilitation site at Bhikampur. If Government amenities continue to be
maintained in Bamana, it would only encourage them to resist
evacuation, thereby obstructing the implementation of the rehabilitation
scheme and defeating the larger public interest.
31. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of with a
direction to the Government to take an appropriate decision, within a
period of three months, regarding the abolition or merger of Gram
Panchayat Bamana. The Government is further directed to close all
official activities of the said Gram Panchayat in accordance with the
decision so taken.
(VIVEK RUSIA)
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
(PRADEEP MITTAL)
JUDGE
MSP

Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANVENDRA
SINGH PARIHAR
Signing time: 09-07-2026
11:51:53