IC-22 'Svi -^w\v\^, ~S^fWS, h'fw'y, <3^ '^ sn^i^i Pi-fi'* 3flt?( *^i^ ^f^a ^-.-. ani^T xra^? WRrn th*1ich "a^ 200 (clfctlST' sn^i'?snwBf??f SINGLEBENCH: HON'BLE w.p. rci PETITIONER RESPONDENTS Vs Sukhin Ba|, aged about 60 years, Wd/o Late Shri Anuj fjiam, R/o Chuchuhiyapara, Bilaspur P.0. & Dis(t. Bilaspur (C.G.). 1. State o| Genera D.K.S. Raipur 2. Colk 3. TheSul 4. Patwari P.0. & 1 ecMr 19.03.2008 Mr. B.R. Ghosh, Advocate forlthe Mr. V.V.S. Murthy, Deputy Government Advocate for the State. arta Heard. Grievance of the petitioner i^ bearing Khata No.1138 Survey N<^ area 0.43 acres & Survey N6.35 intends to sell a portion of the requirement and therefore, she apfj for filling up Form No.22, which registered sale deed. However, Patwari that respondent No.3-Sub Annexure P-1 which mandates would be necessary. Respondent Annexure P-1, has no such power <*l'4ld'Ifl-f t<|t|<"il''9fs^ tfat^K ^STP^FTCT^T JUSTICE DHIRENDRA MISHRA NQ.4153B007 Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Administration, Deptt. Mantralay, Bhawan, Raipur, P.0. & Distt. [C.G.) r, Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh). |>-Divisional Officer, Bilaspur (C.G.) through Sub Divisional Magisfrate, Oistt. Bilaspur (C.G.) petitioner. Advocate General with Mr. Arun Sao, that she is recorded owner of the land i|.34/1 areaO.43 acres, Survey No.34/2 0.80 acres total area 1 .66 acres. She ab|ave land due to some urgent financial ^roached the concerned revenue officer |would be necessary for execution of was apprised by respondent No.4- Qivisional Officer has issued a circular of to effect sale deed colonizer licence No.3, who has issued the drcular of uitiderthe C.G. Land Revenue Code, 19% stfce th* IHC-22 311^1 ^il K-U'h S!^f 5^\^ ^l^ff 'S^ -^M\v\li, anl-M'is, ["icii'My 3T[^?T 'q^ra? ^^-- 11HCTI Shlich""' ""'""""""'"""""^ 20° Iq^ST'""""""""""""""" ari^r ?^iwaf?n -2-1 to direct his subordinates to insist f<| No.22 before execution ofsale deedl Mr. Murthy, Deputy Advoca< instruction from respondent No.3-Sj production of colonizer licence at requirement of taw. However, ifthe the person concerned could be Adhiniyam, 1982 and the revenue No.22 to the intending seller on colonizer licence. Submission made by leamei^ is taken on record. In view ofthe above submissi CM^'41l ^Hdl*'^ f«^<f^)'^K ^T srfigif sii^i ^r colonizer licence while providing Form (e General for the State, after seelang 5|ub Divisional Officer, fairiy submits that the time of transfemng land is not the |and is transferred in vioiation of any law, prosjecuted under Vinirdishta Bhrasta Achran liuthorittes could not refuse to give Form the pretext that he does not possess Deputy Advocate General for the State |on, the instant petition is disposed ^L Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge [^^te^