Zubaida vs The Municipal Corporation Khandwa

1 WP-18513-2025
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 24 OF JULY, 2026
WRIT PETITION No. 7394 of 2025
AYYUB QURESHI
Versus
THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION KHANDWA AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Kabeer Paul, Advocate for petitioner.
Shri Jubin Prasad, Advocate for Corporation.
Shri Vivek Sharma, Deputy Advocate General for the State.
WITH
WRIT PETITION No. 7395 of 2025
SHAHNAZ KHAN
Versus
THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION KHANDWA AND OTHERS
Appearance:

Shri Kabeer Paul, Advocate for petitioner.
Shri Jubin Prasad, Advocate for Corporation.
Shri Vivek Sharma, Deputy Advocate General for the State.

WRIT PETITION No. 7398 of 2025
SHEIKH SHAKEEL
Versus
THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION KHANDWA AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANVENDRA
SINGH PARIHAR
Signing time: 30-07-2026
11:34:40

2 WP-18513-2025
Shri Kabeer Paul, Advocate for petitioner.
Shri Jubin Prasad, Advocate for Corporation.
Shri Vivek Sharma, Deputy Advocate General for the State.


WRIT PETITION No. 7400 of 2025
KAMRUN NISHA
Versus
THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION KHANDWA AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Kabeer Paul, Advocate for petitioner.
Shri Jubin Prasad, Advocate for Corporation.
Shri Vivek Sharma, Deputy Advocate General for the State.

WRIT PETITION No. 7401 of 2025
SHEIKH AKLEEM
Versus
THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION KHANDWA AND OTHERS
Appearance:

Shri Kabeer Paul, Advocate for petitioner.
Shri Jubin Prasad, Advocate for Corporation.
Shri Vivek Sharma, Deputy Advocate General for the State.

WRIT PETITION No. 7402 of 2025
SAJIDA ANSARI
Versus
THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION KHANDWA AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Kabeer Paul, Advocate for petitioner.
Shri Jubin Prasad, Advocate for Corporation.
Shri Vivek Sharma, Deputy Advocate General for the State.
WRIT PETITION No. 7406 of 2025
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANVENDRA
SINGH PARIHAR
Signing time: 30-07-2026
11:34:40

3 WP-18513-2025
IBRAHIM KHAN
Versus
THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION KHANDWA AND OTHERS

Appearance:
Shri Kabeer Paul, Advocate for petitioner.
Shri Jubin Prasad, Advocate for Corporation.
Shri Vivek Sharma, Deputy Advocate General for the State.
WRIT PETITION No. 7408 of 2025
SHEIKH FARUKH
Versus
THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION KHANDWA AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Kabeer Paul, Advocate for petitioner.
Shri Jubin Prasad, Advocate for Corporation.
Shri Vivek Sharma, Deputy Advocate General for the State.
WRIT PETITION No. 7429 of 2025
ASLAM KHAN
Versus
THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION KHANDWA AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Kabeer Paul, Advocate for petitioner.
Shri Jubin Prasad, Advocate for Corporation.
Shri Vivek Sharma, Deputy Advocate General for the State.
WRIT PETITION No. 17766 of 2025
SHEKH HARUN
Versus
THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION KHANDWA AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Kabeer Paul, Advocate for petitioner.
Shri Jubin Prasad, Advocate for Corporation.
Shri Vivek Sharma, Deputy Advocate General for the State.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANVENDRA
SINGH PARIHAR
Signing time: 30-07-2026
11:34:40

4 WP-18513-2025
WRIT PETITION No. 17835 of 2025

ZUBAIDA BEE
Versus
THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION KHANDWA AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Kabeer Paul, Advocate for petitioner.
Shri Jubin Prasad, Advocate for Corporation.
Shri Vivek Sharma, Deputy Advocate General for the State.
WRIT PETITION No. 17847 of 2025
MAJID QURESHI
Versus
THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION KHANDWA AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Kabeer Paul, Advocate for petitioner.
Shri Jubin Prasad, Advocate for Corporation.
Shri Vivek Sharma, Deputy Advocate General for the State.
WRIT PETITION No. 17851 of 2025
RAMJAAN
Versus
THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION KHANDWA AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Kabeer Paul, Advocate for petitioner.
Shri Jubin Prasad, Advocate for Corporation.
Shri Vivek Sharma, Deputy Advocate General for the State.
WRIT PETITION No. 17854 of 2025
SHEKH ISMAIL
Versus
THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION KHANDWA AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Kabeer Paul, Advocate for petitioner.
Shri Jubin Prasad, Advocate for Corporation.
Shri Vivek Sharma, Deputy Advocate General for the State.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANVENDRA
SINGH PARIHAR
Signing time: 30-07-2026
11:34:40

5 WP-18513-2025
WRIT PETITION No. 17856 of 2025

NAFEESA BEE
Versus
THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION KHANDWA AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Kabeer Paul, Advocate for petitioner.
Shri Jubin Prasad, Advocate for Corporation.
Shri Vivek Sharma, Deputy Advocate General for the State.
WRIT PETITION No. 17922 of 2025
SHEKH YUSUF
Versus
THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION KHANDWA AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Kabeer Paul, Advocate for petitioner.
Shri Jubin Prasad, Advocate for Corporation.
Shri Vivek Sharma, Deputy Advocate General for the State.
WRIT PETITION No. 18275 of 2025
SHARUKH KHAN
Versus
THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION KHANDWA AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Kabeer Paul, Advocate for petitioner.
Shri Jubin Prasad, Advocate for Corporation.
Shri Vivek Sharma, Deputy Advocate General for the State.
WRIT PETITION No. 18277 of 2025
FAREEDA
Versus
THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Kabeer Paul, Advocate for petitioner.
Shri Jubin Prasad, Advocate for Corporation.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANVENDRA
SINGH PARIHAR
Signing time: 30-07-2026
11:34:40

6 WP-18513-2025
Shri Vivek Sharma, Deputy Advocate General for the State.

WRIT PETITION No. 18279 of 2025
PARVEEN BEE
Versus
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, KHANDWA AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Kabeer Paul, Advocate for petitioner.
Shri Jubin Prasad, Advocate for Corporation.
Shri Vivek Sharma, Deputy Advocate General for the State.
WRIT PETITION No. 18282 of 2025
SHEKH BABBU
Versus
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, KHANDWA AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Kabeer Paul, Advocate for petitioner.
Shri Jubin Prasad, Advocate for Corporation.
Shri Vivek Sharma, Deputy Advocate General for the State.
WRIT PETITION No. 18283 of 2025
SAYYAD
Versus
THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Kabeer Paul, Advocate for petitioner.
Shri Jubin Prasad, Advocate for Corporation.
Shri Vivek Sharma, Deputy Advocate General for the State.
WRIT PETITION No. 18286 of 2025
SHEKH AZEEZ QURESHI
Versus
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, KHANDWA AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Kabeer Paul, Advocate for petitioner.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANVENDRA
SINGH PARIHAR
Signing time: 30-07-2026
11:34:40

7 WP-18513-2025
Shri Jubin Prasad, Advocate for Corporation.
Shri Vivek Sharma, Deputy Advocate General for the State.

WRIT PETITION No. 18292 of 2025
SHEKH SHAKEEL
Versus
THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Kabeer Paul, Advocate for petitioner.
Shri Jubin Prasad, Advocate for Corporation.
Shri Vivek Sharma, Deputy Advocate General for the State.
WRIT PETITION No. 18293 of 2025
KAYYAM SHEKH
Versus
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, KHANDWA AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Kabeer Paul, Advocate for petitioner.
Shri Jubin Prasad, Advocate for Corporation.
Shri Vivek Sharma, Deputy Advocate General for the State.
WRIT PETITION No. 18513 of 2025
ZUBAIDA
Versus
THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION KHANDWA AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Kabeer Paul, Advocate for petitioner.
Shri Jubin Prasad, Advocate for Corporation.
Shri Vivek Sharma, Deputy Advocate General for the State.
ORDER
Per: Pradeep Mittal, J.
As all these petitions involve the same issue, they were heard together
and are being decided by this common order. For the sake of convenience,
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANVENDRA
SINGH PARIHAR
Signing time: 30-07-2026
11:34:40

8 WP-18513-2025
references to the pleadings and documents are taken from W.P. No. 7395 of

2025.
2. The petitioners submit that they have been in continuous and
undisputed possession of their respective premises situated at Shakkar Talab
Ward, Khandwa, for more than 40 years. According to them, the premises
are being used for residential and commercial purposes, constitute their sole
source of livelihood, and they have been regularly paying municipal taxes
and other dues.
3. The grievance of the petitioners arises from the Notice-cum-Order
dated 19.02.2025 issued by the respondents under Section 322 of the Madhya
Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act, 1956, directing removal of the alleged
encroachment within three days, failing which demolition action was
proposed. It is contended that the notice was issued without conducting any
enquiry, without furnishing supporting material or demarcation, and without
affording an opportunity of hearing, thereby violating the principles of
natural justice and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in In Re:
Directions in the matter of Demolition of Structures, 2024 SCC OnLine SC
3291.
4. It is further submitted that the petitioners' premises neither obstruct
any public street nor form part of any water body, and no material has been
produced by the respondents to establish otherwise. The petitioners also
contend that their applications for grant of permanent patta, submitted in the
year 2018, are pending before the competent authority.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the impugned action
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANVENDRA
SINGH PARIHAR
Signing time: 30-07-2026
11:34:40

9 WP-18513-2025
is arbitrary, without jurisdiction, and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21,

and 300-A of the Constitution of India, as it deprives the petitioners of their
property and livelihood without following the due process of law. Reliance
has also been placed on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India and Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal
Corporation.
6. Per contra, the respondents submit that the writ petitions are devoid
of merit and that the impugned action has been taken strictly in accordance
with the provisions of the Madhya Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act,
1956. It is contended that the petitioners are unauthorized occupants over
Government land forming part of Shakkar Talab, a notified water body, and
have no legal right, title, or interest over the land. Mere long possession or
pendency of an application for grant of patta, it is submitted, does not confer
any enforceable right.
7. The respondents further contend that the notice dated 19.02.2025
was validly issued under Section 322 of the Act of 1956 for removal of
unauthorized constructions and that the petitioners' applications for grant of
patta have already been rejected by the competent authority. Reliance has
been placed on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Hinch Lal
Tiwari v. Kamala Devi and Jagpal Singh v. State of Punjab to contend that
water bodies are public resources which must be protected and that
encroachments thereon cannot be regularized.
8. According to the respondents, the removal of encroachments has
been undertaken uniformly in public interest to preserve the water body and
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANVENDRA
SINGH PARIHAR
Signing time: 30-07-2026
11:34:40

10 WP-18513-2025
protect the environment in discharge of the State's constitutional obligations

under Article 48-A and the Public Trust Doctrine. The respondents pray that
the writ petitions, being devoid of merit, be dismissed.
9. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that this Court, by
order dated 18.04.2026, had recorded the statement made on behalf of the
respondent–Municipal Corporation that, although no rehabilitation policy
was in force, a decision had been taken to consider the petitioners for
allotment of residential accommodation under the Integrated Housing and
Slum Development Programme (IHSDP). It was further submitted that a
sufficient number of flats had been reserved for the petitioners, subject to
further orders of this Court.
10. It was further submitted that the cost of each flat was
approximately Rs. 3,00,000/-, out of which the Municipal Corporation was
providing a substantial subsidy, requiring the eligible allottee to contribute
only Rs. 1,75,000/-. Out of the said amount, Rs. 25,000/- was payable as an
initial deposit, while the balance Rs. 1,50,000/- was payable in interest-free
monthly instalments over a period of 15 years, subject to fulfillment of the
eligibility conditions under the Scheme.
11. In response, learned counsel for the petitioners, as recorded in
the order dated 27.04.2026, submitted that the petitioners were not
financially capable of depositing the initial amount of Rs. 25,000/- or
undertaking the liability of paying the monthly instalments. It was further
submitted that the petitioners would be willing to accept allotment of land on
lease under Section 3(2) of the Madhya Pradesh Nagriya Kshetro Ke
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANVENDRA
SINGH PARIHAR
Signing time: 30-07-2026
11:34:40

11 WP-18513-2025
Bhoomihin Vyakti (Pattadhriti Adhikaron Ka Pradan Kiya Jana) Adhiniyam,

1984, either at the existing location or at any suitable alternative location.
Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
12. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of
the record, we find that the petitioners claim to have been residing at the
subject premises for several decades and assert that they have been earning
their livelihood therefrom. The principal grievance of the petitioners is that
their request for grant of patta/lease has not been considered in accordance
with law and that coercive action has been initiated against them.
13. On the other hand, the respondents contend that the petitioners
are unauthorized occupants over land forming part of Shakar Talab, a
notified water body, and that no patta can be granted over such land. It has
also been brought to the notice of this Court that, by order dated 18.04.2026,
the respondent–Municipal Corporation stated that, although no rehabilitation
policy was in force, the petitioners would be considered for allotment of
residential accommodation under the Integrated Housing and Slum
Development Programme (IHSDP). However, learned counsel for the
petitioners submits that the petitioners are financially incapable of paying the
initial deposit or instalments under the said Scheme and are willing to accept
a lease/patta in accordance with Section 3(2) of the Madhya Pradesh Nagriya
Kshetro Ke Bhoomihin Vyakti (Pattadhriti Adhikaron Ka Pradan Kiya Jana)
Adhiniyam, 1984, either at the existing site, if legally permissible, or at an
alternative location.
14. The claim of the petitioners is that, if other suitable land is
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANVENDRA
SINGH PARIHAR
Signing time: 30-07-2026
11:34:40

12 WP-18513-2025
available, then a patta of alternate land ought to be granted as per the scheme

of the State Government under the Madhya Pradesh Nagriya Kshetro Ke
Bhoomihin Vyakti (Pattadhriti Adhikaron Ka Pradan Kiya Jana) Adhiniyam,
1984. However, it is on record that the application for grant of patta of the
disputed land was rejected by the competent authority. Secondly, the
disputed land was recorded as Talab land; therefore, a patta of the disputed
land cannot be granted.
15. The relevant provision of the Madhya Pradesh Nagariya Kshetro
Ke Bhoomihin Vyakti (Pattadhriti Adhikaron Ka Pradan Kiya Jana)
Adhiniyam, 1984 is reproduced hereunder:-
"Section 3 of the Act regarding Settlement of land.- (1)
Notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being
in force, the land occupied by a landless person in any urban area
on the 31st day of December, 2012 shall subject to the provisions
of sub-section (2) be deemed to have been settled in his favour on
the said date.
(2) The Authorised Officer may, subject to the rules framed or
directions issued by the State Government from time to time,
either settle the land in actual occupation of the landless person or
allot to him any other land not exceeding forty five square metres
in lease hold rights in his favour, provided he adduces following
proof of his residence in the urban area prior to 31st December,
2012,-
(a) the ration card issued to him by the competent authority; or
(b) the written testimony from the appropriate officer authorized
by the Municipal Corporation, Municipality or Nagar Panchayat
as the case may be, certifying that he lived in the area prior to 31st
December, 2012:
Provided that where the landless person is in occupation of more
than forty-five square metres of land, settlement may be made for
land up to 80 square metres in a Nagar Panchayat area, 60 square
metres in a Municipal Council area; however the land settlement
in the area of a Municipal Corporation shall not exceed 45 square
metres of land”.
(3) The lease hold rights accrued under sub-section (1) shall not be
transferable by sub-lease, sale, gift, mortgage or any other manner
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANVENDRA
SINGH PARIHAR
Signing time: 30-07-2026
11:34:40

13 WP-18513-2025
whatsoever except by inheritance.".
Provided that such lease hold rights may be mortgaged in favour
of a nationalized bank or a Co-operative society or a government
undertaking, to securing loan for construction of a expansion of a
residential house.
(4) If the landless person to whom the leasehold rights have been
accrued in respect of any land under this Act, transfers such land
in contravention of the provisions of sub-section (3) or uses the
said land for any purpose other than residential purpose, the
following consequences shall ensue, namely:-
(i) the lease shall stand automatically cancelled on the data of such
transfer.
(ii) such transfer shall be null and void.
(iii) no lease hold rights shall accure to the transferee in respect of
such land.
(iv) the authorised officer shall have the right to disposses the
person who is in actual possession of such land.
(5) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Registration Act,
1908 (No. 16 of 1908) no officer empowered to register
documents thereunder shall admit to registration any document
which purports to contravence charges at such rate and in such
manner as may be prescribed.
(6) The landless person to whom the lease hold rights have
accrued under sub-section (shall) pay development charges at such
rate and in such manner as may be prescribed.
(7) The lease deed in respect of the lease hold rights granted to the
landless person shall be affixed with a recent photograph of the
person and a copy of such photograph shall also be affixed in the
land rent register and where the lease hold rights are granted
jointly in the name of both husband and wife a joint photograph of
both shall be affixed on the aforesaid documents.
3-A. Removal of dwelling houses.-
(1) the Committee constituted by the State Government in this
behalf shall decide the removal of any slum dwelling and its
settlement in accordance with the procedure prescribed.
(2) Any landless person who is occupation of the land of a public
park in the side of a road or in between road and dwellings may be
removed from such place in public interest and may be given lease
hold rights elsewhere.
(3) Any site for dwelling house where the landless persons are
settled under sub-section (1) of Section 3 may be shifted
elsewhere in public interest and their lease hold rights may be
cancelled and such persons may be settled elsewhere.".
4. Restoration of possession.- (1) If any landless person to whom

Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANVENDRA
SINGH PARIHAR
Signing time: 30-07-2026
11:34:40

14 WP-18513-2025
leasehold rights have accrued in the land under section 3
dispossessed from that land or any part thereof otherwise than in
due course of law, the Authorised Officer shall on an application
made to him by the said landless person within six months from
the date of dispossession restore such possession.
(2) If any dispute arises as to the occupation of the land in
question on the 31st December 2012 the landless person claiming
such occupation on the said date may refer the dispute to the
Authorised Officer for decision. The decision of the Authorised
Officer thereon shall be final.
Provided that no order under sub-section (2) shall be passed
without giving a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the
parties in dispute In such places where it is decided to relocate the
existing slums, temporary leases will be issued immediately to the
people occupying those slums.
7. The authorization letters (lease deeds) issued for permanent and
temporary leases will be red and yellow, respectively, and will be
as per Form B and Form C, respectively, as per Rule 7 of the
Rules, 2008. A joint photograph of the beneficiary (husband and
wife) will be affixed to the lease, and their left-hand thumbprints
will also be taken at the designated place, which will be used to
identify beneficiaries during biometric surveys conducted in cities.
The photographs will be authenticated by the authorized officer
under his or her signature and seal."

Vide Order No. F-1-6/2013/18-3 dated 29.04.2013, the State
Government issued a circular regarding the grant of pattas for residential
purposes and constituted a Committee under the Madhya Pradesh Nagariya
Kshetro Ke Bhoomihin Vyakti (Pattadhriti Adhikaron Ka Pradan Kiya Jana)
Adhiniyam, 1984. The Committee consists of the following members:
(1) Collector — Chairman
(2) Superintendent of Police — Member
(3) Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) of the area — Member
(4) Concerned Commissioner, Municipal Corporation / Chief Municipal
Officer, Municipality / City Council — Member
(5) Officer-in-Charge of the Town and Country Planning District — Member
(6) Project Officer, District Urban Development Agency— Member
16. The respondents have proposed to allot a house on lease to the
landless petitioners as alternative accommodation upon payment of a
premium of Rs.1,75,000. However, the petitioners are not in a financial
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANVENDRA
SINGH PARIHAR
Signing time: 30-07-2026
11:34:40

15 WP-18513-2025
position to pay the said amount. Under the Madhya Pradesh Nagriya Kshetro

Ke Bhoomihin Vyakti (Pattadhriti Adhikaron Ka Pradan Kiya Jana)
Adhiniyam, 1984, no such condition requiring payment of a premium can be
imposed while providing alternative land or accommodation to a landless
persons. The respondents have admitted their willingness to provide
alternative accommodation to rehabilitees who have been found to be
landless.
17. We find that the Government, under the Scheme and the Act, had
offered a fair, reasonable, and beneficial alternative to the grant of a patta
over the disputed land. The Scheme recognized that the allotment of open
land would require landless beneficiaries to incur construction costs
exceeding Rs. 1,75,000/-. Accordingly, instead of merely allotting a plot, it
provided a permanent residential house at a highly subsidized cost, requiring
the beneficiary to contribute only Rs. 1,75,000/- comprising an initial deposit
of Rs. 25,000/- and the balance in interest-free monthly instalments over a
period of 15 years.
18. Accordingly, the writ petitions being devoid of merits are
hereby dismissed. No order as to costs.
(VIVEK RUSIA)
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
(PRADEEP MITTAL)
JUDGE
MSP

Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANVENDRA
SINGH PARIHAR
Signing time: 30-07-2026
11:34:40