HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (Art. 227) N0. 66 18 OF 2011 WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. (SB :Hon’ble Mr. T.P.Sharma, J.) Present:— Mr. Rajendra Tripathi, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms. Sangeeta Mishra, P.L. for the State/respondents Not 3 to 5. Respondents No. 1 & 2 not noticed. ORDER (Passed on 14/11/2011) 1. By this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India petitioners have challenged the legality and pmpriety of the order dated 23/9] 2011 passed by Commissioner, Bilaspur Division, Bilaspur (C.G.) in revision case No. 41/A-23/ 20 10—1 1 aifmning the order dated 23/8] 20 10 passed by Additional Collector, Raigarh in appeal case No. 67/A‘23/2009—1O whereby Additional Collector has remanded the case to the Sub Divisional Ofhcer, Raigarh, by reversing the order dated 27/7/2009 passed by Sub Divisional Odicer, Raigarh in Ra. Case No. O4/A-23/ 2008-2009. PETITIOENRS 1. Pooran Singh, S/o Karlik Ram, aged about 60 yaars. 2. Bharat Singh, S/o Dashxath Singh, aged about 63 years. Both the petitioners are residents of village Tadola, Tahsil Pusor, Disfn'ct Raigarh (CG). Versus 1. Balbadra Gond, S/o Sheikh Ram Gond, r/ o village Gadapali, Tahsil Dabra, District Janjgir—Champa (CG). 2. Rajaram, S/o Laxmi Prasad, r/o village Tadola, Tahsil Pusor, District Raigarh (CG), 3. Commissioner, Bilaspur Division, Biiaspur (CG). 4. Additional Collector, Raigarh (CG). 5. Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Raigarh, Disirict Raigarh (CG). 7X Mr. Rajendra Tripathi, Advocate for the petitioners and Ms. Sangeeta Mishra, P.L. for the State/respondents No. 3 to 5 axe heani. Additional Collector has not passed order on merits and simply remanded the case for providing opportunity of hearing to the patties. By passing such order Additional Collector or affirming the order of remand Commissioner have not committed any illegality, requiring any interference in exercise of supervisory jurisdiction in terms of under Article 227 of the Constitution of Indian. Consequently, petition is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed.“ No order as to costs. Interim applications stands disposed of. Sd/— T.P. Sharma Judge