li^..,.^^^. ti II %®'?PX%s ^m:^-" ^ l5^ PetJtiQRer OF AT Ramchand Adwani S/o Prahaiad Adwanl, aged about 59 years, R/o Badhaipara, Raipur. Versus Resporsdertts 2. Blsandas S/o Eate Ratanchsnd; aged about 52 years, R/o Janta Quarter No.2. Sector-3, Devendra Nagar, Rajpur (MP) (Now CG) Devi Bai Dled 2A. Sund.a.Rai S/o Late D.D. AdYv'ans, R/o Bsdhaipars; Tehsii & district Raipur (C.G.) 3. Board of Revenue, Madhya Pradesh, Moti MahaE, Gwallor (MP) (Vvrit Petltlon under Artlcle 227 ofthe Constitution of indla) -I 1 . tvjr.Varun Sharma, counsei forths. petltjoner. ivlr.B.P.Sharma aiong with Mr.Sameer Uraon, counses for respondeRt No.1. ?vione present for respondent r'io.zA. (SB: Hon'bie h4r. T.P. Shamis, J.) (3-8-2011) By thjs petitiQn under Artlcle 227 of the Constitutlon of Sndla the petltioner has chaiSenged the iegality and propriety of the order dsted 4.9.1996 (Annexure P/8) passed by the Board o? Revsnue in RevlssoR Case No.54- 4/9S, reverslng the order dated 5.7.96 (Annexure P/6) passed by the Additlonal Commissioner, Ralpur, Divlslon Ratpur in Case No.427/27//95- 2. Learned counsei for both the partles submit that intsrest of deceased Oevi Bai was not agalnst the present petltioner and order of Board of Revenijs Is In favour of respondent No.1 and against the petltloner and rsspondent No.2, therefore, In the absence of any representatson on behalf of respondent No.2A, petition cannot be disposed of. it?^; 5. 6. ^ -^- 1 nave heard learned counsel for the'perties, perused the order Impugned and cther documents filed on behalf of the parties. Or Order passed by the Additjonal Commissioner, Raipur reveals that Tahsildar, Ralpur has decided the case ex-parte against the origlnai petjtjoner- and respondent. No.2 in Vv'hlch serv'lce of' notice has been sffected upon Dsvki Ba! instead of Devi Bai. Order vvas challeoged before the Addltlonal Commissloner and Additlona! Commssslonsr has •the order and remanded the case to the Ta.hsildar, Raipur. Same chalienged before the Board of Revenue and Bosrd of Revsnus has reversed the order passed by the Additionai Commissloner. On perusal of both the orders impugned, it revea.Is that proper party has not been notlced and witnout affordlng an opportunlty of hearing to proper party order under Section 178 of the Chhsttisgsrh Land Revenue Code reiatlng to partltion of hoiding has been passed which is illegal psrse. The Addltional Commissioner has rightiy quashed the order and remanded ths 'case to the Tahsildar, but vvhile exerclslng revislonal jurisdictlon the Board of Revenue has faiied to exercise the jurisdlctioR vestsd on it and thereby con'imitted iliegaEity. Consequealtiy, tne wrlt petitlon is ailowed. Order by the Soard of Revenue Is hereby qusshsd and order by the Addltional Commissioner., Ralpur ss hereby restored. Partles are dlrected to sppear before the' Tahsildar, Raipur for further proceedlngs on 25.8.2011. Ho order as to costs. No Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge ^ ^