^<" ^.,Z7 HIQH G^URT OP CHHATnSQARH AT^N^SPim W.P. (2271110. 4368 of 2011 PBTITIONBR Non-applicant RB8P01IDBNTS AppUcaat ^', Department of Atomk? Enei^y Qoveram.ent of India, Thmugh Regional Dicector, CR^ AMD Complex, Civil Liaes, Nagpxir (Maharashtx^ Presentty residiaig at Nagpur (Maharashtesi), VBRSU8 1. Gancsh Prasad S/o BIiaiaudas, Retircd Accoiiaits Assistaxit^ Department of Atoxaic Eaergy, presenfly rcsiding at Vfllage & Talisfl. Pratappur, Distt. Surguja (CQ). 2. State of Chhattisgaxli, Through CoUector, Dist Siu^uja (CG). PBTITION IINDBR ARTICLB 227 OF THB COI18TITOTKMI OP WWA. (SB :Hon*ble Mr. T.P.SluuraMi, J.) Present:- Ms. Fousda Mirza, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Vmod Kumar Tekam, P.L. for the State/ respoBdent No. 2. Respondent No. 1 not noticed. ORAL- ORDBR (Passedon 08/08/2011) 1. By this petition under Article 227 of the Constltiatioii of Iiadia petitiacier has chaUenged tJie legalily and propriety offhe oixier dated 29/4/2010 passed by Board ofRevcnue, Bilaspur in revision case No. R.N./16/R-A-68/169/2008 Grain & Tahsfl Pratappur, District Surguja (C.O.) whereby Boaid of Reveniie has quasfaed fhe order passed by Additional CioUector, Ambiteapur District Surguja (C.G.) dated 31/1/2008 in reveaue revision case No. Ol/A-^/06-07 and Tahsildar Pratappur District Sm^uja, C.G. dated 4/1/2007 passed m letter No, 207/Vachak/07 whereby at the iastaiice ofEstate OtBcer appotated under PubUc Premises (Evictkm of Unaixfhorized Oceupaxits) Act, 1971 (iai short 'the Act3) by present petitioner, Tahsfldar iaitiated fhe proceedtog for eviction of respondent No. 1 uiider Section 248 of fhe C.G. Laad Reiienue Code, 1959. 2. Ms. Fouzia Mirza, Advocate for the petitioaer aad Mr. Vmiod Kixmar Tekam, P,L, for fhe State/ respondent No. 2 are heani, -^- 3. Learaed coixasel for fhe petitioner submits fhat Estate 0®cerappomted under Sectfon 3 of fhe Act has aiifhorized fhe Additional CoUector Ambikapur for such eviction under sub-Seetion 2 of Sectlon 5 of the Act and Additional Collector has authorized TahsUdar for such eviction, Tahsildar passed the order of eviction aad has evicted rcspondent No. 1 ui accQidaace with silb- Section 2 of Section 5 of fhe Act but Boanl of Revenue iUegaltty quashed tfae order passed by Tahsildar and Additional CSollector by fhe Qrder impu^ned, 4. Order impugned, copy ofofher appUcations and oider sheet perused, 5, As per material provided on behalf of fhe petltioaer/ /PBdisildar ifiitiated proceeding under Section 248 offhe C.G, Laad Revenue Code, 1959 iclatmg to such eviction. In case of axiy eviction under tfae Act Tafasildar or ofher Authority were not empowered to uritiate aay proceediag under Sectioai 248 of /^ fhe C.G, Land Revenue Code, 1959 therefore aay oxrier passed under fhe C.G. Laad Revenue Code, 1959 was without jurisdiction, Whfle quashixig such order Board of Revenue has not comxmtfed aay illegaMty req^iiiiEtg any iaterference in exercfee of supervisoxy wnt jurisdiction, Consequenfty, petition is liable to be dismissed aiid is hercby dismissed< 6, AU mterim appUcations arc also dismissed, No order as to costs, T.P. Sharma Judge i& ^