HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition No. 251 of 2002 0 R D E R (Passed on this 3'd day of May, 2007) 1. The petitioner being Kotwarwas in possession of the disputed land since 1942. The petitioner is aggrieved by inaction on the part of the revenue authorities not to declare as the petitioner to grant of Bhumiswami rights over the disputed land admeasuring 2.54 hectors, situated at village Daundi Lohara, P.CP. No. 25, R.l. Circle & Tahsil Dauncli Lohara, Distt. Durg. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that having been in continuous possession of the lands in question for such a very long time even on humanitarian consideration, the petitioner should be given Bhumiswami rights. It is also further contended that in another case vide Writ Petition No. 2064 of 2000 disposed of on 3.5.2001 such direction was issued by this Court in respect of 36 Kotwars. Learned counsel for the petitioner further placed‘reliance on a decision of this Petitioner Lakhan Das Kctwar, aged 60 Yrs S/o Shri Samaiia Das R/o Vill. Daundi Loham, District- Durg (C.G.) , Versus Respondents 1. The State of Chhattisgarh Through, Secretary-Revenue, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Raipur‘ 2. The Collector of Distt. Durg, Durg (C.G.) U WRIT PETITON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE X CONSTITUTION ‘f’éé"; Hon’ble Justice Shri Satish K. Aqnihotri Present: Mr. Sameer Sahu. Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Satish Gupta, Deputy Government Advocate for the respondents. Court in WP. No. 2632/2000 (Chhabil Das & others Vs. The State of MP. & another) passed on 30.10.2001. It is further contended that even otherwise viHage Kotwar is also entitled to get some tands as Kotwars . . According to learned counsei for the petitioner a village Kotwar is entitled of 2.54 hectors of land. The petitioner is claiming possession of the land recorded in revenue records as those land is in possession of his predecessors who were also village Kotwars. .‘af . According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the land in E'Eiestion is Mafi land and not service land. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents controverts this statement. . Be that as it may, it seems to me that the petitioner is claiming Bhumiswami rights over the land which is granted to his predecessors prior to 1 942 and the said land is duly recorded by revenue records. . On perusal of the relevant documents placed before me and after hearing learned counsel of both sides, i am of the view that it will be just and fair that the competent authority shall consider the issue after affording proper opportunity of hearing to all the parties and pass appropriate order in regard to claim of the writ petitioner. . ln the result, this petition is disposed of with the direction that the competent authority shall consider the case of the petitioner for grant of Bhoomiswami right, in accordance with law after affording proper opportunity of hearing to the concerned parties, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order / / / 2T1 . as to costs. l Sd/~ Satish K. Agnihotri /‘ Judge .