WM HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (Art. 227) Né‘.4987 of 2009 PETITIONERS/: 1. Omprakash S/o Swarajya Singh, aged (Non-applicants) near about 50 years, 2. Ranjan Bai, D/o Swarajya Singh, aged about 55 years, Both above R/o village Tapora, P.H. No.116/63, R.N.M. Khallari, District Mahasamund (CG) Versus RESPONDENTSI: 1. Likhant Singh, S/o Narottam Singh, (Applicants) 2. Tarun Kumar, S/o Narottam Singh (since died) the foilowing are the legai representatives of Tarun Kumar 2a) Urmila Bai W/‘o Late Tarun Kumar Kanwar, aged about 48 years, 2b) Yuvraj, S/o Late Tarun Kumar, aged about 22 years, 2c) Ku. Priti, D/o Late Tarun Kumar, aged about 15 years, 2d) Ku. Priya, D/o Late Tarun Kumar, aged about 15 years, Respondent No.2(c) & 2 (d) are minors, through their natural guardian/ mother Urmila Bai, W/o Late Tarun Kumar Kanwar, aged about 48 years, All above respondents are R/o village Tapora, P.H.No.116/63, R.N.M. Khallari, District Mahasamund (CG) ’ 3. State of Chhattisgarh, through Collector, Mahasamund, District Mahasamund (CG) 4. Sub—Divisional Officer (Revenue), Mahasamund, District Mahasamund (CG) {Writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India} Present: Mr. Manoj Paranjpe, counsel for the petitioners. Mr. J.S. Baraik, counsel for respondents No.1 to 2 (d). Miss Sangeeta Mishra, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondents No.3 &4. i 2 M> Sinqle Bench: Hon’ble Mr. T.P. Sharma, J ORDER . By this writ petition under Articie 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have chalienged legality and propriety of the order dated 6-3— 2009 passed by the Board of Revenue, Bilaspur (Circuit Court Raipur) in Revision Revenue Case No.RN/12/RA—6/995/2006, whereby the Board of Revenue has quashed the order dated 27-9-2005 passed by the Sub Divisional Officer‘ Mahasamund and the order dated 31-7-2006 passed by the Additionai Collector, Mahasamund. . l have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the order impugned, copies of other orders and documents. . Virtually, by the order impugned, the Board of Revenue has quashed the order of mutation passed in favour of the petitioners herein, but they are stiii at iiberty to approach the revenue court for filing fresh petition for mutation on the ground of acquisition of right either as a result of act of party or by operation of law. . With this observation, the petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. . Consequently, l.A.No.1 stands disposed of. / (14—1 1-201 1) u Soma /