State Must Institutionalize Dispute Resolution Scheme To Make Society 'Litigation Free': MP High Court Suggests
While hearing a PIL against alleged encroachment of public land, the Madhya Pradesh High Court suggested the state government to institutionalize dispute resolution scheme, Samadhan Apake Dwar earlier undertaken by court which yielded result by reducing land revenue cases Taking up such an initiative, the court, said would ensure last mile coverage and to make society "Litigation Free'. The...
While hearing a PIL against alleged encroachment of public land, the Madhya Pradesh High Court suggested the state government to institutionalize dispute resolution scheme, Samadhan Apake Dwar earlier undertaken by court which yielded result by reducing land revenue cases
Taking up such an initiative, the court, said would ensure last mile coverage and to make society "Litigation Free'.
The court was hearing a PIL highlighting protection of Government Land from going into hands of "land grabbers".
The division bench of Justice Anand Pathak and Pushpendra Yadav said:
"Certain steps as referred by the Senior Officers of State Government indicate that steps are being taken for protection of government land and for resolution of disputes at the very beginning, which has earlier been addressed by this Court by undertaking a drive "Samadhan Apake Dwar . The said scheme received much success and brought results for reduction of petty disputes existing in villages regarding Land Revenue, Police cases, Electricity cases and Forest related cases etc. State Government must take initiative to institutionalize such scheme to cover last-mile coverage and to make society "Litigation Free".
The PIL alleged that certain private individuals, in collusion with state authorities, attempted to usurp government land in Village Morar in District Gwalior, measuring 4 bigah and 1 biswa.
The petitioner claimed that the private respondent had previously filed a civil suit in which the State remained absent, resulting in a partial decree in favour of the plaintiffs. They sought a CBI probe into the alleged land grab and restoration of the land to the government.
At the outset, the bench noted that the petitioners themselves, along with the State Government, had remained ex parte in earlier civil suits.
The court had earlier directed the Principal Secretary (Revenue) and Principal Secretary (law) and the commissioner, Land Records to jointly appear before the court to present a roadmap for the retrieval of encroached public land, prevention of collusion between Government Officers and Land Grabbers and formulation of Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for public prosecutors and revenue officials.
During the hearing on August 13, the Principal Secretary (Revenue) informed the bench that all digitisation of all legacy land records was underway. To ensure accuracy, drone mapping technology was opted to determine the exact location and extent of land holdings.
He further stated that dedicated Revenue Officers, including Tehsildar and Sub-Divisional Officers, were being posted exclusively to adjudicate revenue disputes on a regular basis.
The court was apprised of the State's adoption of an 'Automatic Mutation' system, under which any registered sale transaction is immediately communicated to the Revenue Officers. If no objections are raised, the mutation process is completed within seven days.
According to the Principal Secretary (Revenue), these measures, along with last-mile digitisation efforts, reflect the government's commitment to protecting state land and resolving disputes promptly.
The Principal Secretary (Law) outlined the steps being devised to improve the functioning of the Law Department, covering Law Officers at the District and High Court levels.
He addressed concerns over the cases where Government Prosecutors or Additional Government Prosecutors remained absent, assuring monitoring mechanisms would be strengthened through monthly review meetings chaired by the Principal District Judge. He also informed the court that a fast-track system was being conceptualised to reduce delays in filing appeals.
It was further informed to the court that amendments to the State Legislative Policy, 2018, were under consideration to curb belated filings and monitor the performance of legal officers.
The court observed that the measures indicated proactive steps towards safeguarding government land and resolving disputes early.
It directed State to submit affidavits outlining these measures, enabling further deliberation for public welfare.
The matter is listed on August 25.
Case Title: Deepak Kumar v State of MP (WP-10997-2025)
Counsel for petitioner: Advocate V.S.Chauhan
Counsel for R1 and 2: AAG Ankur Mody, Senior Advocate Vivek Khedkar, GA Sohit Mishra, AAG Puran Kulshrestha
Counsel for R3: Advocate Ravi Chaudhari
Counsel for R4-6: Advocate Siddharth Sharma