Lalbahadur Soni vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:88341
1 WP-39977-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR

BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL MISHRA
nd
ON THE 2 OF NOVEMBER, 2026
WRIT PETITION No. 39977 of 2026
CNR No.: MPHC010709772026
LALBAHADUR SONI
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shi Anil Kumar Dwivedi - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri A.S. Baghel - Government Advocate for the respondents/State.
ORDER
This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been
filed seeking following reliefs:-
"(I) It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may
kindly be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of
mandamus directing the respondents no.2 to consider
the application of the petitioner for allotment of the land
and for grant of the Dharnadhikar under the guidelines
of the State Government and till then no any eviction of
the petitioner from the land in subject be carried out.
(II) It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may
kindly be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of
certiorari by quashing the impugned order dated 07-09-
2026 (Annexure P-5) passed by respondent no.4, in the
interest of justice.
(III) Any other relief/order/direction/prod which this
Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and
circumstances of the case, may also kindly be granted to
the petitioner along with cost of entire litigation."
2. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is in possession of
small piece of the property bearing Khasra No.852 area 0.008 acre situated at
Village Manpur, District Umaria since more than 30 years by making the
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SHUBHANKAR
MISHRA
Signing time: 02-11-2026
16:54:11

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:88341
2 WP-39977-2026
house wherein petitioner is residing along with his family members. The

respondents Authorities have issued guidelines for grant of Dharnadhikar
who are found in possession of the land on or before 2014. Revenue
Authorities have prepared the report and Panchnama that the petitioner is
found in possession of land since 20 years. Petitioner has also submitted
application cum reply that the petitioner is in possession and prayed for
allotment of the piece of the land and for grant of Dharnadhikar. Without
considering the aforesaid facts, Tehsildar has passed the impugned order
dated 07-09-2026 directing for eviction of the petitioner. Therefore, this
petition has been filed.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter is identical
to the order dated 12/02/2026 passed by this Court in the case of Pappu
Raikwar and Others Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh and Others i n Writ
Petition No.4953 of 2026, wherein following order has been passed:-
"4. In such circumstances, this petition is disposed off
by directing the petitioner to file a certified copy of this
order to the respondent No.2 who, in turn, is directed to
consider and decide the pending application of the
petitioner dated 22.01.2026 within a period of 90 days
from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
5. Till the final decision is taken by the Collector,
District Chhatarpur on the application filed by the
petitioner for grant of Patta with respect to the property
in question, further proceedings under Section 248 of
MPLR Code pending before the Tahsildar (Nazul),
Chhatarpur, District Chhatarpur shall remain stayed."
4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents/State has pointed out
that the order passed in the case of Pappu Raikwar (supra) is not identical. In
the present case, final order under Section 248 of MPLRC has been passed
by Tehsildar and petitioner has been directed to be evicted from the premises
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SHUBHANKAR
MISHRA
Signing time: 02-11-2026
16:54:11

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:88341
3 WP-39977-2026
in question, whereas in the case of Pappu Raikwar (supra), the proceedings

under Section 248 of MPLRC were pending adjudication and the Court has
specifically observed that the said proceedings shall remain stayed till the
application filed by the petitioner therein under the Dharnadhikar Adhiniyam
is finally decided. Therefore, the order passed in the case of Pappu Raikwar
(supra) is on different facts and is not identical to the case of the present
petitioner.
5. When confronted with the aforesaid proposition, learned counsel for
the petitioner has again made arguments before this Court that in the case
of Pappu Raikwar (supra) proceedings were also finally decided.
6. However, when this Court has gone through the order passed in the
case of Pappu Raikwar (supra), has found that this Court has stayed the
proceedings under Section 248 of MPLRC pending before Tehsildar and
directed the respondent No.2 to decide the application of the petitioner within
a period of 90 days. Therefore, it is incorrect to say that the proceedings
under Section 248 of MPLRC were finally decided in the case of Pappu
Raikwar (supra). Therefore, the said case is entirely different from the
present petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner has made two attempts to
misguide the Court despite being apprised by the State counsel.
7. Under these circumstances, this Court is not inclined to entertain the
present petition.
8 . Accordingly, the petition is dismissed with cost of Rs.10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand Only) to be deposited by learned counsel for the
petitioner in the Account of M.P. High Court Bar Association (SB A/c
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SHUBHANKAR
MISHRA
Signing time: 02-11-2026
16:54:11

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:88341
4 WP-39977-2026
No.519302010000549, IFSC CODE: UBIN0551937, Union Bank of India,

State Bar Council High Court Branch, Jabalpur), within a period of seven
working days from today. The said amount of cost is to be personally borne
by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.
(VISHAL MISHRA)
JUDGE
Shbhnkr
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SHUBHANKAR
MISHRA
Signing time: 02-11-2026
16:54:11