Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2007 DIGILAW 555 (MP)

Union of India v. Ajit Baraiya

2007-05-10

RAJENDRA MENON

body2007
ORDER 1. This petition purported to be filed by the Union of India seek s a direction to the State Government and Officers of the State Government for protecting the ancient monuments and to preserve the national heritage. The Archaeological Survey of India and the Department of Archeology aggrieved by certain inaction on the part of the State Government and their officers in the matter of protecting some ancient monuments of national importance in the city of Gwalior have filed this petition. 2. On the basis of notice issued by this Court respondent No. 1 has raised certain preliminary objection and Shri R.D. Jain, learned senior counsel submits that this petition is not filed properly by the Union of India, it is filed by an unauthorised person. That apart, Shri Jain points out that under the provisions of Constitution of India, if there is a dispute between two organs of the State, the matter has to be agitated before the high powered committee in accordance with the principle laid down in the case of Canara Bank and others v. National Thermal Power Corporation and another [ (2001) 1 SCC 43 ] so also the principles laid down in the case of Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited v. Chairman, Central Board, Direct Taxes and another [2004 AIR SCW 2934]. Similarly, placing reliance on another judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Chief Conservator of Forests, Govt. of A.P. v. Collector and others [2003 AIR SCW 1251] Shri Jain points out that the intra-departmental or disputes between various organs of the State has to be resolved by referring the matter to the high powered committee which has been constituted by the Government of India in pursuance to the directions issued by the Supreme Court in the case of Chief Conservator of Forest, Govt. of A.P. (supra). 3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on going through the judgments referred by Shri R.D. Jain, learned senior counsel, I am of the considered view that the writ petition directly before this Court without referring the dispute for consideration by the officials of the Government is not permissible. Writ petition directly before this Court without resorting to resolve the same by inter-Government system of resolution in accordance with the observations made by the Supreme Court in the case of Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. (supra), is not proper. Writ petition directly before this Court without resorting to resolve the same by inter-Government system of resolution in accordance with the observations made by the Supreme Court in the case of Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. (supra), is not proper. In case Union of India is aggrieved by any action or inaction on the part of the State Government and the officers of the State Government, the Union of India has to take up the matter with the authorities of the State Government or the concerned Ministry in the State Administration. Admittedly, in the present case the matter is not referred to any higher authority of the State Government nor have the Central Government and State Government made any effort to resolve the conflict if any, that being so, the petitioner should first take up the matter before the appropriate forum and only thereafter the petitioner is entitled to approach this Court for redressal of the grievance in accordance with law. Writ petition directly before this Court without following the procedure contemplated by the Supreme Court in the case of Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. (supra) is not proper, therefore, writ petition is not maintainable. 4. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with liberty to the Union of India/petitioner to take action first for referring the matter to State Government and to resolve the dispute after negotiation with the officials of the State Government. 5. Petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid.