HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH BILASPUR Z} Writ Petition (C) No.6202 of 2011 {Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India} Present: Mr. Rajkamal Singh, counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Vinod Kumar Tekam, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondents No.1,2 & 3, on advance copy. Sinqle Bench: Hon’ble Mr. T.P. Sharma, J ORDER (1 9—1 0—201 1) 1. By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged legality and propriety of the order dated 30-6-2011 passed by the Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Korba in Appeal Revenue Case No.53/A-13/07-08, whereby the order of dismissal of application for private easement under Section 131 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 (for short ‘the Code’), has been reversed. l have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the order impugned, order passed by the Tahsildar and copies of other documents. . As per the order of the Tahsildar, the Tahsildar has dismissed the application for private easement of way filed on behalf of respondent No.4 . PETITIONERI: Umashankar Singh S/o Late Shiv Sahay (Non—applicant in the Court Singh, aged about 56 years, R/o Village below) Risda, Balconagar, (House No.128, Behind Housing Board, Shanti Nagar), Korba, Tahsii & District Korba, Chhattisgarh‘ Versus RESPONDENTS: 1. State of Chhattisgarh through its Secretary, Department of Revenue, Mantraiaya, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2. Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Korba, Tahsii & District Korba, Chhattisgarh. 3. Tahsildar, Korba, Tahsii & District Korba, Chhattisgarh. (Applicantinthe Court below) 4. Girdhari Lal S/o J.R. Rajbhar, aged about 53 years, R/o Viliage Risda, Baiconagar, (Behind Housing Board, Shanti Nagar), Korba, Tahsii & District Korba, Chhattisgarh. 3Z7 herein under Section 131 of the Code which was challenged by respondent No.4 and other viHagers before the Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) and the Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) has reversed the order of dismissal of application, but has not passed any subjective order. Operative part of the order passed by the Sub Divisional Ofhcer (Revenue), Korba reads thus: ~ wwmwWmWI We W mm sit—1 It a0 :fo 375/13 WRIT 0.020 so gm WWW&W.W$WWWW asstsmWRHWErtmuoaim/afew/m—oa ammm1222008§mt$mastn$w WWmsl Wammwm mel mumwmwa‘rlsm . Virtually, the order dated 30-6-2011 passed by the Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Korba in Appeal Revenue Case No.53/A-13/07—O8 is an un- executable order, may be illegal in nature, but does not require any Soma interference. Consequently, the petition is dismissed summarily. No order as to costs. ~~M.w.¥ l.A.No.1 stands disposed. Sd/- J T.P. Sharma Judge