» ^ .t^- ^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR fC.G.) WRIT PETITION N0. i'7 6^/2004 / PETITIONER: RESPONDENTS: Smt. Shanti Bai, Widow of Kedardas aged about 64 years R/o. Vill.Dhobni Thehsil. Bilaigarh, Dist. Mahasamund(C.G.). VERStlS 1. . State of Chhattisgarh Through the Secretary, Departmenf of Revenue,;, D.K.S.Building, Raipur (C.G.) 2. The Collector, Mahasamund/ Dist. Mahasamund. (C.G.) &^""" ^<t^\ Dist. Mahasamund.(( ^\fi^^ v 3. The Nayab Tahsildar, •9^ T^I^ D;l-;. ^, \'v ^" \^ 'y ?\ <^ •^:^/^ ^^-.^^j/\^^^ ^ •^^^i Q>- t > Teh. Bilaigarh Dist. Mahasamund (C.G.) 4. Smt. Karmat Bai, W/o. Samaru Ram, aged about 46 years, Occupation - Kotwar at village- Dhobni, Teh. Bilaigarh, Dist. . Mahasamund .At present residence of Vill. Sajapali, P.S. Basna, Dist. Mahasamund (C.G.) WRIT PETtTION UNDER ARTICLES 226/227 OFTHE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. XI-HC-22 -3^Ef ^|Hld<4, ^Tll^^Ko, fa^ll^<l< i3TT^?T 'V^SR <.^.f. H»o. j^-^y ^^ HW^il ^^^—-—•——•——^F^ ^OO fN^^T* 3TT^T'^T f^ri^^n^T 5^^icb -y^a liiiiiiiiiiunii' n > "7^ 'ST^T ^RTT^T ^tt^T 13.7.2004 Nlaib Petitioner by Shri F. S. Kharej Respondents No. 1 to 3 by |Lawyer. Heaid. The petitioner has preferred fl]ds |of the Constitution of India chaUen^ |P/16 aad P/17 made by the |Respondent No.4 (Smit Karmat Ba^), |fhat fhe Respondent No.3 aUotted jacrcs to the Respondent No.4 as <Se|va |appoixited as Kotwar. The case of fhe petitioner |naoiely Charaadas was appoiated Iproprietor before aboUtion of the [8,20 acres land was given to him jprovisions of fhis Act Charandas b< llaad. After deafh of Cliaraadas his jfhe petitioner) was appoiated as |No,3 was not entifled to aUot said jmake entdes m fhe revenue reconlls |Bhoonii\ Further case of fhe petitioner |Sectk>ns 168, 169 read with sectio^i [1959 fhe petitioner has acqiiired ri^hi |fhe operation of law she has becoi]{ie Advocate, phri Anaad Kumar Tiwari, Paael chl^forl41T1 'RTR^f'? f^st <Rl^l< iT3Tf^m3n^T petition miderArdcle 226/227 ^iag fhe rcvenue entories Annexure Tehsildar iri favour of the I. It is xaentioned ia the petition peace oflaad admeasuring 8.20 Bhooxni^ because she has been a(s |is fhat father of the petitioner Kotavar by tiie Ex Malgujar and ^roprietary ri^hts Act 1950 aad Ipy fhe fhen Ma^ujar. As per the icame 'Bhooxni Swami' of fhe said |wife namefy Jaold Bai (mother of Kjotwar. Therefore the Respondent ^nd to the Respondent No.4 aad about the said laad as 'Seva ^s fhat ia view of fhe provisions of 185 offhe Laad Revenue Code, ri^hte of occupancy tenaat aiid by Bhuini Swamdi of fhe aforesaid XI-HC—78 W^T^IK^ a^T u^.p '^TPTl^FT, ^'tfl~OT%', f^TRTy ^n^l^ ^?^ (TI?t3^T) R},.. IWT^R^Ita^i^ -1. laad given to her fafher by fhe petitioner was in possession of tl| ^^1 ^ -fe^t T^^T ^^^^Ti¥r llien Malgujar aad proprietor, The e said laad froin her fafher's tune, On fhe basis of fhe false mforma|ion ffae Respondent No.4 obtained fhe laiid. It has not been inentioncjd ia. the entire petition that fhe petitioner had ever inoved be^>re fhe conipetent aufhority for conferring r^ht of Bhoomi Swa^ni on her, Therefore, ia fhe first iastaiice fhe petitioner should in^ve before fhe conipetent aufhorily for conferring r^ht of Bhoomi Swaini over fhe laad ia dispute ia accoidaD.ee with law aad fhereaft^r, if required, to pursue the reinedy which may be available to her un4er fhie law, In view of fhe above, fhis [petition is disposed of finaUy with liberty to fhe petitioner to apprc|ach to fhe conipetent authority in. j' I accordaace wifh law, In view of fhe above order I of. A. No. 4162/2004 stands disposed Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge ^/^ V-?