é x ‘ \(9‘7‘3‘ $mg§e .n ‘ {mnm 6% IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR __/ WRIT PETITION No. ___§§§__2005 (/ Jaideo, Son of Sundro Chowhan, a\dAgad about 50 years, PETITIONER { (if 7% Resident of Village Siyarpali, ®§2gy>§j¢ Tahsi1$& District Raigarh, .«n “K77 . w‘ g“ Q ~’ O ChhattiSgarh. .:/ VERSUS ___.__———— RESPONDENTS / 1. The State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, Revenue Department, D. K. S. Bhawan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. The Collector, Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. The Naib Tahsildar, Raigarh, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. /4. Videshi Chowhan, Son otl Muni Ram aged about 33 yrs. Resident ofivillage Loing, Tahsu & District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. 5 , k v - XI—HC-78 33W, m; MW w/ Wm on”. .55 H 200 WW(W> ‘ WWW ‘* agmwraw claim'mg Bhumiswami right para 5 0f ths pctitjon with an was Kotwar of village Loing, agn'cultural land bearing khasra No.9 rakba 11.50 acres by the then Malguzarf Zamin‘dar namely Balbhadra Singh of Raigarh prior name was recorded in the revenue record (Zamabandi), copy of revenue record of 1924-25 is hled as Annexure—P; 1? Further case of the petitioner is that the said land was i11 possession of late Dasru upto 1945-46 and thereafter Kotwar post was given to 0?-03-=2005 Shri Le‘aladhar Yadav, c Heard on admission. The instént yetition h‘ undm‘ Articlc 226/ 227 of th maction on the part of the res The ease of thenef‘fima .V V‘ Dasru, ‘who was aunsel for the petitioner. as been preferred by the petitioner e Constitution of India, agamst the pondents. er is that he is the grand son of late Kotwar from 1924—25 to 1945—46, Ln respect of the land mentioned in avexment that his gmnd father Dasm District Rajgar‘h and he Was given to 1950 and that is why his. his cousin namely ,Mnkru son of Raghunath, who was workin §s as Kotwar from 1945—46 to 1955- 56, and thereafter the said post was given-to one Saheb Ram and Saheb’ Ram having no male .ssue, hence, the post of Kotwar was given to his son—in—law namely Videshi Chouhan, respondent No.4 hemin‘ \\/ XI-HC—78