HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR D.B.: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sunil Kumar Sinha and Hon'ble Shri Justice Radhe Shvam Sharma Writ Appeal No.327 of 2010 Appellant Respondents Murli Sahu, s/o Shiv Charan Sahu, aged about 45 years, R/o Datranga (Vill & PO) Raipur Tahsil, Raipur Dist, CG State versus 1. State of CG, through Commissioner (Land Records), Raipur, Raipur Dist, CG State 2. The District Collector, Raipur, Raipur Dist, CG State 3. Tahsildar Raipur, Raipur Dist, CG State 4. Bhueshwar Sahu, S/o Late Anand Ram Sahu, aged 48 years, 5. Jeevan Lal Sahu, S/o Shri Dukhu Ram Sahu, aged about 48 years, 6. Smt. Rupa Bai, W/o Late Adhari, aged about 46 years 7. Smt. Pushap Bai, W/o Late Narain Singh, aged about 50 years 8. Tikam Sahu, S/o Tula Ram Sahu,aged 56 years 9. Kome Lal Sahu, S/o Late Daya Ram Sahu, age not known to petitioner 10. Rohit Sahu, S/o Late Ganesh Ram Sahu, aged about 52 years 11. Tej Ram Sahu, S/o Late Ganesh Ram Sahu, aged about 52 years 12. Ramswaroop Sahu, S/.o Late Shiv Charan Sahu, aged about 41 years 13. Preu Sahu, S/o Late Shiva Charan Sahu, aged about 37 years 14. Bhanu Pratap Sahu, S/o Late Shiv Charan Sahu, aged about 43 years 15. Uday Ram Sahu, S/o Late Dhukhu Ram Sahu, aged about 39 years 16. Ram Krishna Sahu, S/o Late -:'f':^ "^ /k^ \ \^^/ ^ Dukhu Ram Sahu, aged about 51 years 17. Khanyiah Sahu, S/o Late Dukh Ram Sahu, aged about 49 years 18. Dhan Prasad Sahu, S/o Late Dukhu Ram Sahu, aged about 39 years 19. Khuman Sahu, S/o Late Dhuku Ra, Sahu, Aged about 34 years 20. Smt. Punia Bai, W/o Late Girdhari, aged about 38 years 21. Foolwasan Bai, W/o Late Puna Ram, aged about 33 years 22. Birchhu Ram, S/o Late Baghela Gond, aged about 34 years 23. Budhan Gond, S/o Shri Katgalu Gond, aged about 39 years (All R/o Village Datranga, Raipur Tahsil, Raipur Dist, CG State) Present: Shri Kshitiz Sharma, counsel for the appellant/petitioner. Shri U.N.S.Deo, Government Advocate for the State/respondents No.1to3. Writ Appeal under Section 2 of the Chhattisaarh Hiah Court (Appeal to Division Bench) Act ORAL ORDER (Passedonl 1th May, 2011) Per Sunil Kumar Sinha, J-: Heard on admission. 2. The appellant/petitioner has filed this appeal against the order dated 30-8-2010 passed in Writ Petition (C.) No.4900/2010 by the learned Single Judge ofthis Court. 3. By the impugned order, the learned Single Judge, in view of the provisions of Section 8 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 (henceforth 'the Code') has declined to interfere in the writ jurisdiction and has further observed that the petitioner, if so advised, may approach the Board of Revenue seeking indulgence of :y."";';i :<-^. ^^ 'rj/ 1.^^" ^ ^' ^a ^7 the said authority to execute its own order dated 9-3-2010 (Annexure P-1 in the writ petition). 4. Shri Kshitiz Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the appellanVpetitioner argues that even after a clear direction in the order dated 9-3-2010 (Annexure P-1 in the writ petition) passed by the Board of Revenue, the subordinate authorities are not taking necessary action. In fact, his sybmission is that this Court may issue suitable direction for execution of the order passed by the Board of Revenue. 5. In view of the provisions of Section 8 of the Code, the Board of Revenue itself has superintending jurisdiction over all authorities being subordinate to it. 6. In view of the above legal position, the learned Single Judge has rightly declined to interfere in writ jurisdiction for issuance of any direction for execution ofthe order passed by the Board of Revenue. 7. For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any substance in the writ appeal. The appeal is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed. — Sd/- R.S. Sharma Judge Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge Gopal