Interim protection against civil imprisonment warrants must be maintained pending disposal of statutory revenue revisions.

The petitioners filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging a warrant dated 01-05-2017 issued by the Sub-Divisional Officer for their civil imprisonment.

This warrant arose from proceedings under Section 250 of the M.P. Land Revenue Code, following an order dated 23-02-2016 by the Commissioner, Gwalior, which affirmed an order for their arrest.

The petitioners had already filed a statutory revision (No. 339/2016-17) before the Board of Revenue, Gwalior; however, their application for an interim stay was rejected on 11-05-2017.

The petitioners argued that the warrant would render their pending revision infructuous and that the original Section 250 proceedings were barred by limitation and contradicted by a Patwari report.

1. Whether the court should exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 to stay an execution warrant while a statutory revision is pending before the Board of Revenue.

2. Whether the petitioners are entitled to interim protection to prevent the pending revision from becoming infructuous.

The court's decision was centered on the principles of administrative justice and the exhaustion of statutory remedies under the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, specifically Section 250 regarding the summary eviction of persons in unauthorized possession.

The court exercised its discretionary power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to ensure that a statutory right of appeal or revision is not rendered nugatory by the execution of a lower authority's order while the matter is sub-judice before a superior revenue forum.

The Court declined to adjudicate on the merits of the Section 250 proceedings or the limitation argument, noting that these issues were currently pending before the Board of Revenue in Revision No. 339/2016-17.

The Court observed that because the revision had been pending for a considerable time, the "ends of justice" required an expeditious disposal rather than a parallel merit review by the High Court.

To prevent irreparable prejudice to the petitioners (agriculturists) and to preserve the status quo until the Board of Revenue reached a final decision, the Court found it necessary to keep the arrest warrant in abeyance.

This ensures that the statutory remedy of revision remains effective and is not frustrated by the physical imprisonment of the parties before their legal arguments are heard.

It directed the Board of Revenue, Gwalior, to decide Revision No. 339/2016-17 within three months of receiving the order.

Crucially, the Court ordered that the warrant dated 01.05.2017 for civil imprisonment shall remain in abeyance until the disposal of the revision by the Board of Revenue.

All questions of fact and law remain open for the Board's determination.