MP High Court: writ jurisdiction under Article 226 cannot be used to reward litigants who abuse the process of law

Deciding a bunch of writ petitions and three connected contempt petitions arising from encroachment-removal proceedings under Section 250 of the M.P. Land Revenue Code over land at village Khajrana, Indore, the Madhya Pradesh High Court at Indore (Justice Sandeep N. Bhatt) allowed the writ petition of the original landowner, M/s Shree Ram Builders, and dismissed the connected petitions filed by persons claiming to be in possession. The Court found that the five petitioners in the connected petitions could produce no title deed or proof of valid possession, and had misused an earlier order of the Court — meant only to let them make a representation — to get encroachment proceedings reopened against the true owner, who had already succeeded up to the Supreme Court. Holding that the Sub Divisional Officer's order reopening those proceedings was illegal, arbitrary and an abuse of the process of law, the Court applied Articles 14, 19 and 300-A of the Constitution to protect the owner's right to the property and set the order aside.

It held that the discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 exists to do justice between parties and must not be exercised to give a premium to litigants pursuing frivolous or vexatious claims. One contempt petition was disposed of with a direction to hand over possession within 30 days; two others were dismissed as no longer surviving.