y c c. ^fL^- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPURJ^G.) WRITPETmON N0. [7.53 /2004^ PETITIONER: RESPONDENTS: ,/ VERSUS Mohan lal Gandan S/o Phirtu aged -about 33 years R/o Village Ganekera, Tehsil Basna, Distt. Mahasamund, (C.G.) 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through the Secretary, Department of Revenue, D.K.S. Building, Raipur (C.G.) ^\N--^..-^ - D.K.S. Buildin< \^^'^"^^ 2- peCollector, , ^ot •:''"^'^:r^I'.. Mahasamund, '^^^ '•'"^-^^•'''v" Dist. Mahasan y^wlff 'Aa^ I^^^V """''.,... ^^-^.. Dist Mahasamund. (C.G.) 3. The Nayab Tahsildar, / Teh. Basna / Dist. Mahasamund (C.G.) 4. Pirati Ram S/o Ghasiram aged about ^^ years, Korwar R/o Village Ganekera Tahsil Basna Distt. Mahasamund (C.G.) ^.._L^^^ ^ /-" WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLES 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTEON OF INDIA. , XI-HC-22 '3FoE[ ^||^|<r|14, ^Tl1^'ll<o, f®(<r11^^< r ^W<ri\ 5b*1ich^^-^^^ ra?--------'----"^ 200 'fN^T' 3?T^[^RT 'f^ri?T3ni?r 5b^icb <-i[^a ^<\. \:y. 3^c^T'^na^ ^rf^cT Advocate. hri Anaad K Tiwari, Paael L3.7.2QQ4 Petitioner by Shri F. S. Khare, Respondents No. 1 to 3 by ^ ^er. Heard. The petitioner has preferred fh^is petition un^ler Ardcle 226/227 <|>f fhe Constitution of India chaBengjing ftie revenile entries Aanexure f/16 made by fhe Naib TehsUdar ii^ favour of fhe Respondent No.4 jPirsati Ram), It is mentioned ia f^ie petition fhat fhe Respondent ^Io,3 aUotted a peace of laad ^espondent No,4 as tfSeva Bhoomi' Kotwar, The case of fhe petitioner is <=hj^t^4l'l 'RTR^ff ^ Fs<<1 <P»l^l< ^T ^Tf^TH 3TT^T ^etitioner were appbmted as Kot ^roprietor before abolition of fhe ^ 17.12 acres laad was given to fhem ^rovisions of fhis Act they became ^ind beiag legal heir fhe petitioner j|ias acquired ftie Bhoomi swami ^ights by way of succession. Thercfi ^iititled to allot said laiid to fhe Resp ttie revenue records about fhe said 14iid as 'Seva Bhooxm'. Further case of fhe petUioner i >ns 168, 169 read wifh sectioU |s that ia view of the provisions of 185 offhe Land Revenue Code, p.959 the petitioner has acquired ri^hts of occupaacy tenaat and by pie operation of law he has becoin^ Bhuioi Swaoii of tiie aforesaid )^nd given to his fafher aad aace^tors by the then Ma^ujar aad easunng 17.12 acres to the mse he has been appoiated as it fafher and aacestors of tihie ^ar by fhe Ex Malgujar and ^roprietaiy rights Act 1950 aad |by fhe fhen Malgujar. As per fhe Bhooini Swami' of fhe said laiid >re fhe Respondent No.3 was not londent No.4 aiid make entries in It- XI-HC-22 3?n^T'^T f<>ii<=b sn^i $*i^iict) ^f^a ^^^. ) ^L ^ ~5^[^i^ii<n^ . ^Tlly<t<o, faafyy HW^ti ^hHi^h '^ra?, ^.p.^o.i^J^ '^ 200 'I^^ST' 3?n^T'^TT^IT "^rftn - ^ mentioiled proprietor. The petitioner was ia fafher's time. On fhe basis of No.4 obtaiaed the larid, It has not been petitioner had ever moved b< conferring right of Bhoomi instaace fhe petitioner should for conferring r^ht of Bhoonu accordaaice wifh law and which mav be available to him In view of fhe above, fhi$ Uberty to fhe petitioner to accordaiice with law, In view of the above order of. Ipossession of fhe said lattd firomi his ti|ie false information fhe Respondent Sw^mi fliereaffer, mkder chN(d4!v1 'RT^f ^ 'fe^l' <PJl^i< ipr 3?rf^m 37i^r in fhe entirc petition fhat fhe )4fore fhe coxapetent authonty for 7^xni on Tiim, Therefore, ia the JSrst s|iove before fhe conipetent authority |Swami over fhe laad ia dispute in if|er, if required, to pursue the reniedy fhe law. petition is disposed of fiiially with to the coixipetent aufhority ia appr^ach ,A. No. 4253/2004 stands disposed Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge [Tft^ ^Psi^ 4'M.