^r HIGH COURTOF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR PETITIONERS: RESPQNDENTS: Writ Petition No.1487 of 1992 1-A. Bharat Lal Gupta S/o Late Shri Motilal Gypta aged about 52 years R/o Kaser Para Chakradhar Nagar Raigarh (C.G.) 2. Sant Vijay Singh S/o Late Shri Keshav Singh, Occupation Government servant resident of Civil Lines, Raigarh. Versus 1. State of Madhya Pradesh (now State of Chhattisgarh) Through Collector Raigarh 2. Chief Secretary Department of Revenue State of Madhya Pradesh (now State of Chhattisgarh, Vallabh Bhawan (now D.K.S. Bhawan), Bhopal (now Raipur). 3. Smt. Narayani Devi W/o Shri Ramswaroop Das Rateria, r/o Raigarh tahsil and district Raigarh (M.P.) (now C.G.) {Petition underArticle 226/227 of the Constitution of India} Preserit: Mr. B.D. Guru, counsel forthe petitioners. Mr. Sushil Dubey, Govt. Advocate forthe State/respondents No.1 & 2. Sinale Bench: Hon'ble Mr. T.P. Sharma. J ORAL ORDER (17-8-2011) 1. By this petition the petitioners have challenged legality and propriety of the order dated 25-7-91 passed by the State Government in Case No.1- 43/90 on the basis of representation made by respondent No.3 herein Smt. Narayani Devi. Operative part ofthe said order reads thus, "SRP^T ^T i^u^ ^T 3TT^T W:rT^T '?FR Pl4)v1-l ^ f^RTf ^ Rl4^d tl 3I?P<^T ^^ ^PR ^r ^iT ^TT ^!Tcf5?m ^ll^c^<L| -^Tcf? ^ "qr ^T ^ •^ 'Sf^ STcR '•T^ ^FgcTT t, ^f^-T ff?'T ^T iTKT ^T t f^ vTT -^pr ^|c|"[^d ^t ^TT^ ~^ ^ TTT^ ^r 31|c)t^-L| v^3u^ ?t | ^N^T: ^FI^ 'z^' ^ :'/ ,'' ./" ^ 1^R 3HT^t? 3F!T "7«TFT ^R cf^ i]^g ^^ ^ f^P? STT^T ^^ 'W^ 11 aiicie-i Soma v3Li^cM qRR^raT ^r srRncr^T srfto? "^r ^r ^chl^ te|T ^nTTT f sft^ "?T? ?T f^ ^TT^ t f^ cb^chCN1 ^ ^T ij^g ^m" STTcf^-T f^R^T WRTT ^T | ^N^T -iW^ "^t ^t "q? i^o^ TTT^ ^ ^TT^RTT ^t t sfr? ^ ^H i;[pr ^T sn'cr^T ^^ zn- ^r^ sr^ ^ 11" 2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the order impugned andcopies of other documents. 3. As per undisputed facts of the case, unoccupied land was leased out by the competent authority in favour of the petitioners herein same was challenged before the Commissioner on the basis of representation of respondent No.3 herein Smt. Narayani Devi which was dismissed and again respondent No.3 made representation before the State and on the basis of aforesaid representation, the order impugned has been passed bytheState. 4. Counsel for both the parties have shown their inability to show the provisions which empower the State Government to revise the order passed by any revenue authority under the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 (for short 'the Code'). 5. It is pertinent to make a note that the Revenue Book Circular/scheme has not been framed in exercise of any power conferred upon the State Government under the Code and the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 is a complete code in which procedure relating to land has been prescribed. In absence of any settled power, the order impugned is not sustainable under the law and is liable to be set aside. 6. Consequently, the petition is allowed and the order impugned dated 25- 7-91 passed by the State Government in Case No. 1-43/90 is hereby set aside. However, it is made clear that the respondents are at liberty to approach proper forum against the order of allotment made in favour of the petitioners. No order as to costs. _- - Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge