Shri Kishore Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:90248
1 WP-11886-2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR

BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANINDER S. BHATTI
th
ON THE 5 OF NOVEMBER, 2026
WRIT PETITION No. 11886 of 2022
CNR No.: MPHC010275162022
SHRI KISHORE SINGH AND OTHERS
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Atul Choudhari - Advocate for the petitioners.
Shri Dharmanshu Singh - Panel Lawyer for the State.
ORDER
This petition has been filed by the petitioners seeking following
reliefs:-
"1. It is humbly and respectfully prayed to the
Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to issue
direction/order/writs to the Collector and
Tehsildar Goharganj, District Raisen, to
record the name of the petitioner according to
the sale deeds in respect to the properties
which are part of sale deeds and the same
may be recorded in the revenue records such
direction may be issued in the interest of
justice.
2. It is humbly and respectfully prayed to the
Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to issue
direction/order/writs directing the respondent
to decide the application of petitioner filed on
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PRADYUMNA
BARVE
Signing time: 06-11-2026
16:24:09

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:90248
2 WP-11886-2022
14.01.2021 for recording their name
according to the order of commissioner in the
interest of justice.
2A. The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased
to issue a writ of certiorari quashing the
impugned order dated 10.01.2022 (Annexure
P-7) passed by Nayab Tahsildar being
beyond jurisdiction.
3. Any other relief which the Hon'ble court
may deem fit may kindly be passed."

2 . It is contended by counsel for the petitioners that the Naib
Tahsildar, who is the Authority subordinate, is not implementing the order
passed by higher Authority. The right accrued in favour of the petitioner on
the strength of order dated 22.08.2016 (Annexure P-1) passed by the
Additional Commissioner, Bhopal, cannot be disputed by the Naib Tahsildar.
The Naib Tehsildar is only required to carry out the mutation proceeding
while dealing with the application of the present petitioner. Unfortunately,
the Naib Tahsildar while passing the order dated 10.01.2022 (Annexure P-7)
rejecting the application filed by the petitioners has made an observation to
the effect that original allotment of Patta is required to be revisited as in
absence of any permission by the Collector, the said land could not have
been alienated by the original Patta holder and as per opinion given by the
District Prosecution, a writ petition is required to be filed before the High
Court. It is further contended by the counsel that since the order dated
22.08.2016 (Annexure P-1) has already attained finality in absence of any
challenge to the same, the Tahsildar had no other option but to mutate the
name of the present petitioners. Therefore, the order dated 10.01.2022
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PRADYUMNA
BARVE
Signing time: 06-11-2026
16:24:09

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:90248
3 WP-11886-2022
(Annexure P-7) is liable to be quashed. It is also contended by the counsel

that non-compliance of the order would amount to judicial indiscipline and
therefore, a disciplinary action against the concerned Naib Tehsildar is
warranted.
3. On the contrary, the counsel for the State has opposed the prayer
and submitted that it is a case where there was alienation by the original Patta
holder of the property in absence of any approval by Collector and therefore,
the Naib Tahsildar has rightly passed the order order dated 10.01.2022
(Annexure P-7).
4. Heard submissions and perused the record.
5. It is evident from the perusal of record that an order dated
22.08.2016 (Annexure P-1) passed in favour of the petitioners in Case No.
469/appeal/13-14 has attained finality in absence of any challenge to the
same. As per the said order, there are directions for mutation of name of the
present petitioners as regards the land record and therefore, once an order
was passed by Additional Commissioner, the Naib Tehsildar has no other
option but to comply with the said order. The application filed by the
petitioners could not have been turned down by Naib Tahsildar on the
ground that there exists some opinion to question the subsequent alienation
by filing petition before this Court. The approach of the Naib Tahsildar, in
the considered view of this Court, is contumacious. The Naib Tahsildar,
being an Authority subordinate was under an obligation to ensure
compliance of the order passed by higher Authority i.e. the Additional
Commissioner. Therefore, the Tahsildar's venture contained in Annexure P-
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PRADYUMNA
BARVE
Signing time: 06-11-2026
16:24:09

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:90248
4 WP-11886-2022
7, is liable to be set aside.

6 . Resultantly, the petition is allowed. Order dated 10.01.2022
(Annexure P-7) passed by the Naib Tahsildar, Up Tahsil Obedullaganj,
Tahsil Gauharganj, District Raisen stands quashed. The matter is remitted
back to the Naib Tahsildar with a direction to take a decision, on petitioners'
application for mutation in the light of order dated 22.08.2016 (Annexure P-
1) passed by Additional Commissioner, Bhopal Division, Bhopal within 60
days from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
(MANINDER S. BHATTI)
JUDGE
PB

Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PRADYUMNA
BARVE
Signing time: 06-11-2026
16:24:09