@ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition No.4297 of 1991 RESPONDENTS: PETITIONERS: 1. Smt. Chanda Bai, aged about 26 years, W/o Ram Sevak, Rlo Jawahar Road, Room No.151, Ghatkopar, Bombay-5. 2. Premlata Bai, aged about 21 years, Laxmi Narayan, aged about 24 years, 4. Prem Narayan, aged about 17 years, ail through Asarfilal S/o Ramcharan Gupta, aged about 6O years, Cultivator, R/o Village Uslapur, Tahsil Bemetara, Distt. Durg (M.P.) (now C.G.) (General Power of Attorney) Versus 1. Rameshar (Died and deleted) 1(a). Udailal son of Rameshwar Pardhi, aged about 5O years. (b). Subhelal son of Rameshwar aged about 55 years. Smt. Vidyabai widow of Bansram, aged about 50 years. (d). Panchram son of Rameshwar, aed about 37 years. AII residents of village Bahera, Post Office Babamohtara, Tahsil Bemetara, District Durg. Smt. Shilobai, wife of Rattilal, aged about 48 years, resident of Rajpur, Tahsil Dhamdha, Distt. Durg. Smt. Ramlabai, wife of Banauram, aged about 45 years, resident of viliage Chuchrung, Tahsil Simga, District Raipur. (g). Smt. Ramotinbai, wife of Jahar Singh, aged about 42 years, resident of village Damoda, Tahsil& Distt. Durg. (h). Bematarhin Bai, wife of Patilal, aged about 40 years, resident of village Pagbandhi, Tahsil Dhamdha, District Durg. Shri K.W. Bhoi, Nayab Tahsildar, Bemetara, Tah. Bemetara, Distt. Durg (M.P.) (now C.G.) S.D.O. & Competent Authority, Bemetara, Distt. Durg (M.P.) (now C.G.) 4. Collector, Durg District Durg (M.P.) (now C.G.) (c)- {Petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India} g Present: Mr. V.G. Tamaskar, counsel for the petitioners. None present for respondents No.1(a) to (h) and 2. No representation is made. Mr. Akhil Agrawal, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondents No.3 & 4. Sinqle Bench: Hon’ble Mr. T.P. Sharma, J ORDER (7—9-201 1) 1. By this petition, the petitioners have chaiienged legality and propriety of the notice dated 1-7-51 issued by the Nayab Tahsiidar, respondent No.2 herein, and the demand notice issued under Sections 146 & 147 of the Land Revenue Code for recovery of arrears of Iand revenUe of Rs.1,13,850/— from petitioners No.1 & 2 herein. 2. l have heard learned counsel for the parties,‘perused the petition, impugned notices and copies of other documents. 3.. The aforesaid demand notice reveais that the revenue officer has issued demand notice for recovery of arrears of land revenue and the petitioners are required to file reply and contest the case or to deposit the money. Considering the scope of aforesaid demand notice, i do not find any substance in the petition. Consequently, the petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. However, the petitioners are at liberty to contest the said demand notice before he revenue authorities. Sd/— 'T.P Sharrna Judge i t