^'"yvi i-' ^.s-l-^ ippiii-ai ^QURT OF CHHATTtSGARH AT BiLASPuR Wrlf Peiitiont'Art.227) No.StSS of 2005 1. Rakesh Kumar Vsrma, aged aboui 50 years, S/o Makhan Singh, R/o Villase Keshdabri, TahsK Dhamdha/Bareia, Dfetricf Durg (C-.G.) 2. Smt.Giia Agrawai, W/'o Shri Sanjay Agrawal, R/o ViHage Keshdabri, Tahsii nl -!h i"ir'sE-g P?i^fr'rkf P"s*'" :'f ' amana/yareia, s-'istrict uurg (U.u.) \ iana Danl. D.;o Sekhar Danl, R/o '-/iiiage Keshdabri, ihamdha.'Bareia, Distri< T''i^><-?i1 ( oiicS'ii /ral /"? \ ^'i-^.'.S.. uur •Resioonder.is i-annli^ftint% Versus Satish Dans, S/o cnanaraseKnar Prsshsd Dsnl, R/Q V'lls^^ Keshdsbris '^''fa nc-fli r^i^*'?rv>«~iS^i«'at'£<<'ir/'<ti''"k ii8<?m,»^T l\t ^yf^ t«Ei^ii L.riKSti i i^iti«si/i,^e3ifc?!<ai l^i.Si.US.'l i«?Ui^ (C.G.) Komal Singh, S/o Late Khedu Singh, R/o Vlliage Bl|a, Tahsil Saja, District Durg (C.G.) S/o y< «t /'iyv^'^ </StEf r<i/aiiaa 3. Lakshman Ssngh, Slngh Thakur R/o ViHage Bjja, Tahsii Saja, DiSirict Durg (C.G.) 4. Udisthir Singh, S/o Shri Koma! Singh Th.akur R/o Village Bija, Tahsii Saja, District Durg (C.G.) 5. Jeevan Singh, S/o Komai Singh Thakur R/o ViHage Bija, Tahsil Sajs, District Durg (C.G.) 6. SrRt.NSa Singh Thakur.W/o Shri Dilsp ilngh Thakur R/o V'Siage Blja, Tahsil Saja, Dlsirict Durg (C.G.) 7. Onkar Singh, S;o Shri Komai Ssngh Thakur R/o Vii'lage Bija, Tahsi! Sala, District Durg (C.G.) 8. Govsrnment of Chhattisgarh, through ColSector, Raipur (C.G.) 9. Board of Revenue Biiaspur (C.G.), through Its Cha'rman Petition uncier Ariicie 227 ofthe Consfltution of india) R.^r ^c>yM<*^i C,t^rii»'ae*-T<Ti^f'3( t»*ii'if»S^^r .S.fvf^'i |ic*r^<c>r> <^/M"?'<s/si '?!^»'^^/^ in/sfii'l^riffie'^ tVii .r't^iM^i i Oiii iVt^'a<L<av<a Vvii-ii )vi6.r^iiV| r^ix^ii, i^/ui *t3?t?i (^» U tw ^vfi.si.sw s^i ^. ?;1r.D.C.Verma, counsei for respondent No.1. Mr.Raghvendra Pradhan, counsei for rsspondents No.2 to 7. Mr.Sanjeev Kumar Agrawai, Panei Lawyer for respondent [^o.S/State. -«-\ 'S/ J' y ^' -^ (SB: Hon'ble Mr. T.P. Sharrr,a, J.) ORD&R (Passed on 14-7-2011) 1. By this petition under Articse 227 of the CoRstitution of india the petitioners have challenged ths isgailty ar.d propriety of the ordsr dated 11.5.2009 (Annexure P/8) passed by fhe Board of Revsnue in Case No.R.N./05/R-A- 6/840/2006, whereby the order dated 6.2.2007 impiaadlng the present pststioners as a party has been reversed by the Board of Rsvenus on the ground thai same has besn passed ex-parte. 2. Lsarned coiinssi for the petitloners submits that vide three sais deeds t'ne preseni petitlonsrs have acquired and purchased the property from Komai Singh, thsir namss have been mutated sn revenus record and rin pustskas have aiso been issued in thesr favour, cut wJihQut prov.dlng opportunsty of na-i!?'("j to them, at the insiance of rsspondsnts No.2 to ?, revenue record has been corrscted. Lsarnsd counsei further submlts ihat the petitioners •A'ers necessary party before rsvenue authority. At the t'ims of mutation on the ground thatthey are BhoomisVi/ami, their names haven mutatsd. On the other hand, Sesrned counsei for respondsnts No.1 to 7 oppos®ths petitson and submit that the Board of Revenue has rightiy reversed the order dated 5.2.2007 passad ex-parte and has righfSy fixed ths case nsanna. tor runrier er LUUM. nrl 4. S have heard iearned counsei for the parties, perussd the order f.TspugRed and other documents fiied on behaif of the parties. 5. Froirs perusai of copies of the saie desds snd copies of R'!n Pustikas tliad on 'oshaif of ths petitioners, it appears that the pstitioners have purehassd the ia".ds by registersd ssie deeds, their names have bsen mutated and Rin Pustlkas have been issued to t'ne pressnt pstltioners show that they are Bhoomiswvarni of the iand shown in their Rin Pustikas i.e. recorci of right. Wfthout provta'f'ng opportur.ity of hearing to She psrsons '.vhose namss have been recorcssd as Bhoomiswam! in revsnus record, no order against Sha parsons or correction of aforesaro revenue record can bs iiiegaiiy psssed. The Board of Revsnue has rsvsrsed the order impieading the names of the pat'itiorsers. 6. in case, any order is passed by the Board of Revsnus or any authorifry' reiaiins to the iantis 'n'hich have been rscordeti !R ths namss of the prssent ^ - petitioRers they ars nacessar/ party. Revsnue ! >'min*'StE^^ *. CTUi.U^iEt.iEto"^ 'A'are unaer obiigaiion to impiesd them as a necsssa?/ party. The Board of Rsvenus has denied for impieading them as s necessary party, fherefore, if wouid not be iegaiiy possibte to the revsnue authorities fo pass any order effscting the rlghis of the petitioners without impiesding them as a party. 7. Wiih the aforesaid obser^ation, the petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. —~— -_~ Sd/- : r T.P.Sharma i Judge jj