wa^f hltGHG^RT'l^GNNXTIli^NHW •.^^ffil»iiltK^;^^^£^N0..2^^^1^:^i^ iMB^stil Pgl-tTIONE^S NGn-^pjslfciant/ pbjectors l|il|ian^,;'l^^:i'|$unv^ir||^^^^ ^%<|ii3|fc;^y|ar^:;'i^:^^^,;;^fi^^ .^/i^ai"HA^j^||^Fyi(^l^,:,;agmi-i^Q|t^,i;|1 ^.^^fyN |%lf:;:i!^s?:'^^I^^'^^ ^,Q|||nfc^t®^Riia^i?Na^ ili>oij^i|i|i|sstijij»^ ••4.%:';1-^{Tii|tiB."tl^iiW^ :j^^:^edIaiil?^||^^Ji|lgiSro ^- •''.'"''' ~"''i:' ^•K:'^•i^'•I ''^'.^'^i\^ .•::^%:'" ^5.^^ti|^raf|8i^Sa|u^i::i^:^|Nn|l^l^ :';!.^at^:^|^ar^,'':i^.:'^!'^^ ^|^(io|||i|iW|||i|^^l|^|^^^ ia0^|it)Qtrt^^li|^;^|j.S|jE^ 7. /^dh Ftem;^^^^^^^ ::/^oyt'32i|yeai^^.:;^;:'';^Y,l:l.:^;.:::1^,^ 8. Btiaoy^ Sal5y,^^^^^^ .':atx»utW,yeai%,:''.''-;,'l.;.'1"^^ ©.^irenelraKuR^rSahu^^^^ ^^t.3&::years;,/:\;;:.!i,j:^^ 1JO.^rtatN|shacl»S/oNat|iat<^,s(^^ -.30';y^rs;..;,l.:^^;^,^,.^ .^^:'. .,1,1,.|i||ii||||i^^^,-|i®^||||^||a|^|||®||<l:^ '•si|u|||^|ea|s;|'^^t^||l^^^,|:|.^ ;:1^^r|l<i|Nui,^i^^(^a|9Bi^si%g^ ^,iatNut!5S';year^;l','';t';.;::^fli.ri.|:^'''^^ 13.^an^l^ynSahu, S^^^al^e^ :^iy6ars^..';',':;l//'':-^:;:;:^ ^;.4.{%i^^^Ram^[,^NJshay,^^|j;4i|w^ :.,^at3^^421.yeare;.;;;'.:^,.,^:.^ I^.R^Ial ^hu,a/oBtiu|tu,^e^ ;.;^.;ye^s:'t-.::^..^^':^^^ ;4^^uwah^;S%^Buddttt|Nis^ii^ia|o^ :^yyears;';::^';'./.^:.~^^ l^llllram, S/o ©ai^l^lSa^uia|e|t|at»N^ fv^:Y^^iiears|Y:^::',.:':;}':.;'.,.;'^ .l!8.|l^u^t?Mui^ar,'.;^&:;^^attyiN ,^;ab6|t^'y6|F|;i^^,^^|.:,];:^'^^t-^ ?^,ll^|H^?s^^<3|^ilfl^il^saiiiis|^ :''^^tl^l^1,':^:l'^E,^ ^|||||g.|^^l|l^e|ta^^|is||^ |1^iati(ii40^aiis;l.^|'l:'-FI:^?^;'':^ Mi^.fii: ^.sw' •^^^^ 'i&^fSi^ 3y?S :^ ^ RESPONDENTS ^^^ ^.A'^^^^fi^t^?^P^?^^H^^^I'^'" ^Wtiy -^- AI1 resident of ViSiage Ranka, Tahsil Berla, District Durg (C.G.) VERSUS Habib Ahmed Khan, S/o Shri tbrahim Khan (Dead Throught his L.R's.) 1. Khairnnusa, Wd/o Sate Habib Khan, aged about not known, 2. Fahim Khan, S/o late Habib Khan, aged about not Known, Both are R/o Village Ranka, Tahsil Beria, Distnct Durg (C.G.) 3. Aabeda Begam, D/o Sate Habib Khan, aged about not known, R/o Pachripara, Durg (C.G.) 4. Sajida Begam, D/o iate Habib Khan, aged about not Rnown, R/o Nurani Chowk, Rajatatab, Raipur (C.Q.) 5. Swaieha, S/o late Habib Khan, age about not known, R/o Nurani Chowk. Rajatalab, Raipur (C.G.) 6. State of Chhattlsgarh, Through: the Collector, Durg (C.G.) 7. Ashok Kumar, S/o not known, aged about notknown; 8. Til^ram, S/o not known, aged about not known; 9. Ramu, S/o not Rnown, aged about not known; 10-Pavan Kymar, S/o not known, agect about not known; 11.8anturam Sahu, S/o not Rnov/n, aged about not known; 12.Rupendra, S/o not known, aged about nof known; 13.Krishna, S/o not known, aged about not known; 14.Shyamlal Koshte, S/o not known, aged about not known; tS.Keskar, S/o not known, aged about not known; IS.Mantram, S/o not Rnown, aged about not known; ,.,^'^Q^ ;.< '"^ \vv 'l '^ \ "ll v.-..^ 17.Mehtal, S/o not known, aged about not known; 18.Gaindu(al, S/o not Rnown, aged about not known; 19.Vimai, S/o not Rnown, aged about not known; 20.Khi(awan, S/o not known, aged about not known; 21.Ramji, S/o not known, aged about not known; 22.Awadhram, S/o not known, aged about not known; 23.Ramkumar, S/o not known, aged about not known; 24.Anandram, S/o not known, aged about not known; 25.Rameshar, S/o not known, aged about not known; 26.Somnath, S/o not known, aged about not known; 27.Bikulram, S/o not known, aged about not known; 28.Turadhan, S/o not known, aged about not known; 29.hiansram Sahu, S/o not Rnown, aged about not known; SO.Ramkumar, S/o not known, aged about notknown; Respondent No.7 to 30 are R/o Viitage- Ranka, Tahsil Berla, Dlstrict Durg (C.G.) (Writ Petition underArticte 227 ofthe Constitutlon of Sndia) (SB: Hon'ble Mr. T.P. Sharma,J.) Present:- IVSr.P.P.Sahu, counsel for the petitioners. Mr.Sushil Dubey, Govt.Advocate forthe State None present for other respondents, though served. ORALORDER (Passed on 5tnAugust, 2010) 1. Heard. .-:"~"";P&<-S 'y^ ~\ 1 "^ \\z- \ 'v.^^ -:9<^—s^'> -4- 2. I have perused the order dated 15.12.2009 (Annexure P/1) passed by the Board of Revenue, Raipur in Revenue Revision No.12Z/A-7/2003-04. 3. Learned counseS for the petitioners submits that order passed by th© Additional Collector, Bemetara in Revenue Appeal Case No.6/A-1/2002- 03 was appealable order in accordance with Sectlon 44 (2) of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 (for short 'the Code'), therefore, the Board of Revenue was not competent to entertain the revisjon in accordance with sub-clause (i) (a) of clause (1) of proviso to Section 50 of the Code. Learned counsei further submits that even otherwise the order passed in Revenue Case No.152/A-7/1960-61 dated 6.4.1961 afterinquiFy was not Isable for set aside in terms of Section 50 (2) of the Gode. The Sub DMsional Officer, Bemetara and the Additional Collector, Bemetara after due consideration the Segality & propriety of the case have dismi^ed the petition fiied on behaif of Habid Ahmed Khan (since deceased), therefore, the Board of Revenue has committed lilegaiity in quashing the order passed by the Sub Divisionai Officer, Bemetara and the Addltjonal Collector, Bemetara. (t was obSigatory on thisciaimant deceased Habid Ahmed Khan to file appropriate petition against the order dated 6.4.1961 passed in Revenue Case No.152/A-7/1960-61 instead offiting any petition under Section 57 (2) of the Code. Section 44 (2) reads as under:- "(2) Savs as otherwise provlded a second appeai shal! iie against every order passed in first appeal under this Code or the rules made thereunder- (i) by the Sub Divisional Offlcer or the Coitector to the Commissioner; (ii) by the Settlement Officer to the Settlement Commissioner; (iii) by the Commisstoner to the Board- (a) Ifthe original order has in the first appeat been varied or reversed otherwise than in a matter of cost; or (b) On any of the following grounds and no other, nameiy:- (i) that the order is contrary to iaw orusage having the force of Saw; or (ii)that the order has faited to determine some material issue of iaw or usage having force of law; or (iii)that there has been a substantiai error or defect in the procedure as prescribed by thls Code, which u^ "^k •v^•;."^ •^ tl :^-^-'1 ^ may have produced error or defect In the decision of the case upon ments." 4. Order passed by the AdditionaS Coilector was appealable in second appeal and in such circumstances revision was not maintainabie under sub-ciause (i) (a) of clause (1) of proviso to Section 50 of the Code. 5. White entertaining and allowing the reviston, the Board of Revenue has committed ilSegaSity. Such order is not sustainabie under the law. S. Consequently, the petitlon is aliowed. Order dated 15.12.2009 passed by the Board of Revenue ss hereby set asjde. No order as to costs. Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge