c. ;J° INTHEHON'BLEHIGHCOURTOFCHHATTISGARHAT BILASPUR WRITPETISQN (227) NO.^Z^-OF 2009 ^ PETITIONER k-". ^'^y' €€^ Gram Panchayat Pipraud Through its Sarpanch g(i° Smt. Parwati Sahu, aged about 42 years, W/o Brijlal Sahu R/o Village Pipraud, Block Abhanpur, Tahsil Abhanpur, District Raipur (C.G.) (Name of the Petitioner / objector is not mentioned as aparty in cause title of impugned order dated 16. 06.09} VERSUS RESPONDENT 1, State of Chhattisgarh, ThEough Collector, Raipur Dismct Raipur (C.G.) 2. Naib Tahsildaj-, Abhanpur, Tahsil Abhanpur, District Raipur (C.G.) 3. Board of Revenue, Chhattisgarh Bilaspur, Circuit Court, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.). ^i.- Munni Bai Wd/o Late Ramnidhi Pandey, Aged about 65 years 5. Narayan S/o Late Ram.nidhi Pandey. Aged about 55 years 6. Balbhadra Prasad S/o Late Ramnidhi Pandey. Aged about 50 years li't:Ni —^ G 7. Laxmi Bai D/o Late Ramnidhi Paridey. Aged abdut 45 years AU Respondents No. 4 to 7 are R/o viUage Pipraud, Tahsil Abhanpur, Dista-rct Raipiu- (C.G.) __ ^-u-^-- ReAp<?aWeA2j- a?i.<- 4^p^t C£XMJ;)»^- <- no-^ ^"g. ••II />- f<- WRTT PEtlTlON UNDER ARTICLg 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ^t"'i"v'":i'ssy^^^H^^ ^^^'?;.c'^^^^^^^%iS % nf HIGH COURT OF CHHMTISGMWt AT BILASPUR Sinate Baich: Hon'bte Shri Justiw Prashant Kinnw Mishra PETITIONER RESPONDENTS Writ Prtitton (227) No.3622 / 2009 Gram Panchayat Pipraud Versus Steite of Chhattisgarh and (^iers. Shri Satyendra Sahy, counselforthe petiUoner. Shri Ajay Dwivedi, Dept&y Govt Advocade for the State/ responderts N0.1&2. Shri Sourabh Sharma, wunsel fwthe rropondentsNo.4 & 6. Shri Ashok Dubey, counsel for r^pondents No. 5 & 7. WRFT PETITKW UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTmiTION OT tNDIA ORALOfmER (31A8.2C10) Hearel. (2) The (wtitioner hs®cgtted m (lueBttonthe l^d!ly,,<f^ pnyri^y of the order passed by the Board of Revenue, CMhatti^arh on 16-06-2009 (Annexure P/1) altowrg the rewwm |M-^eFred by the respondents No. 4to 7 and therebycmfefflr^ Kiumiswami nsfrt ofttw subsed land adm^isuring 22.16 acres sitysted at vlBage - Pyrayd, Tahsit - Abhanpur, Dtetrict - Raqaur, in tavourofttwse respwdCTte. (3) From the facte emeigir^ from the documents annexed by ttie parties in their re^aectiv®pteadir^ it appears thatttie subjedt taiKls belpr^ to the Ex-Malgujar /jirqMletw of viUsge - PlpranKl Shri fttehant Vaishnav Oas. One Ramiwlhi Pandey the predecessor hiirrt»e8t^oC the nsspondente rtrtalned the lease of ttw stftgect tand ftoin the proprietor on 24-07-1949 <Amiexure R/1). T1»safcl RamiticB'il ParKtey moved an applteatkm before the Syb Divteional Qfficw (Reyenye), rf*^"^., •vS, ''•\ YS- ^t Raipur sometimes m the yeesr 1973-74 and on the sajd a licaBpn the Sub Divteional Offteer pass«l an order on 16-12-1974 CCTnifeiinng Bhumiswami Rtghts on Shri Ramrudhi Pamley under SectKm 57^?of the Code. This onter wa$ passed with respe<A to 23.16 ewsr^ ofland.' (4) Vvte order dat^l 2&^)3-1984, the AcUitional Cqltector, Raipur set-aslde the said order of ttie Svte Divistonal OffhsCT (ttewnue^ by initiating suo-fftrtu revi^w }»weedi(^(sand the matter vias remamted back with a directjon to the Sub Divisionat Offteer to verify tt originat fchasra papere and other reoorete before the comjig into ftwc» of Abotition of Pr^rietary Righte (Estetes, Mahate, Alienated Land^Act, 1%0 and pass an order in accordance with law. The resppndente No. 4 to 7 preferred a revision before the AddBwal Commjsstoner, Ftaipiff, whfeh was dismissed w 0&-02-1994 and thereafler they p feiTed revision before the Boarc! of Revenue 4.P.) which vtfasttedtted pn 1^h August, 19^ (Annexure R/7). (5) \flde Annexia-e R/7 dated 12UI Ai^ust, 1999 fhe BoanJI of Revenue had in fect dismissed the reviaon p'^wed by No. 4 to 7 aftsroteerving thatthe Additional ColleGtor hee remanded the matter for tresh pnquiry after venfyir®the recwds of arajl prp" to the year 1949 and the resiwndente No. 4 tp 7 cgn agitate thar csBe befwe the Sub Divistonal OfRcer whteh shall be cwis(dered tey Uie saud ofRcer. (6) The respondente No, 4 to 7 titereafter mowd an g^te^Uon under Sertton 57(2) ofttie Code on 27-10-2Q(% (Annexure W2) i.e. after six years, and prayed fbr conferral of BhurmBWRBri ngM^Sntt; / Munn»Bat W<yo Ramnidhi Panctey. :^5^°-^I"^?^^^i^S?3;'fi^^-^@ .^s' ^ < -3- (7) The Sub DivlSKXial Offteer (Rwenue), Raipur issued pyblic noBce on 14-12-2005 vide Annexure P/3 and the copy ther$of;v^is endorsed to the Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Pipraud, the p<^ltiCTier herein, It was mCTitioned in the notice that the Gram Panch%E|rt;rrrey submit the resdution or ojMnion before the date of hearir^. (8) Vide Annexure P/4 dated 02-09-2006, the Sub Dhnsionat Offlcer dismiss^l the apptication pre^n'ed by the respondente No. 4to?. The Sub Divisional Officer <rt»servedthat the proceedirg is to be cxw^gued as per theremand oreler passed by fte Additional Collwtttf on 28-03- 1984. The Sub Dhristonal Officet (Revenue) referred to the<>prdef passed by the Addittonal Colleqtor wherein tt w^ mCTttonedJthsfcthe, possession ofthe responden* has been entered jn ftielAasra of 1949 to 1951 subsequenUy wWi a different ink amj it>w8s |itso observed that the s^nature of Mahart Vaishnav Dges avsulabte m ft® Patta is not tallying with his signatyre<^i(Ah%^as^n£^w|hJtem^ sfatement beftire the Sub DMstonal OffiGeron 07-10-1974 th®igh,the Sub Divistonal Officer has observed In the later p»rtof the ordwthat the s^natures maycBfferafter(^pseoif25yea[sye*fteas»itipnmatte by r^pondents regeuiiBng y?nt of tease has not bewi fbund acceptable eyen after (he ^srtement made by the Msdiant Vai^inav .Das because no e >rt whatsoever was made for about % yegffs for recordir^ the name of respondents No.4to 7 and no ®<p(a(iationhas been offered explaining the deliay in mcwng Jthe appBcrtton. tt js ^le observation of the Sub Dlvt^tnal Officer that use of ditferent ink teads t6 ah inference that ttie Patta ws®oWained sub^qyently, It has^also Been observed that ft js the duty <rf Uie person claiming isnUt^meint 1p ^ ., • - get his name recorded as BhurRiswamt to proove that the aHerisflpR or ° 1 -^- arrangement of grant of tease was nwie by ttw fxi^wietpr befare comir^ Irto ftiree of AtoWon of PnqMwtaiy Rjghts tet Iri silawfttl manner and that he is witltted to hold ttie land even if it hafe been recoreled in the name of Stsrte Govenwnent thipygh wtthtEg'itocl of tinw. The Svto DMstonal OfRcer, aftertaWng into oonsideBaflon, the enflrety of ttie facts as ateo the ot^ection submitted by ttie,yj| rejected ttie appltoation, Annexure P®isthe Gram Panchaysrt on %-12-2005^er^n th®Rancha^it hgs re^red that the sufcaect land be kept reserved <w,the i^e ^ the;,p)U&jSes Cter^ah anct in some part the fwest department hastreKte.plantation, Representation Ann®<ure P/6 & P/7 has been made before Jthe Cotlector.Raipt.ir during his camp srt Abhanpyr in course of Jansamasya Niwaran Shivir. (9) The respondente No. 4 to 7 pnferred a rwjsacQ twftxe ttie Boarel of Revwue Chhattisgarh dh-ectty challenging the wcter passeKlby the Sub Divisional Offtoer wthout ftlwQ any appeat or rew^on before the Colleetor or the Commtestoner. The Board of Revenue has aBwwed the revteKvt pet'rtion bythe Impiyned order. (10) Goun%l Ibr the petitioner has streinyously i»gedth^|he sybjwt land is Vhe grass lanct wrtiich is awnlable to Uie vjttsgere fix gRBiing of cattles and use of pubNc at large thereftwe; it shpuM not have been seUed in fevour of respondents No. 4 to 7 for confemng BhuirtaMami Rights. He wouldsybmit that the Board of Rewnue has GommKtgd a sertous error of taw and jurisdtetton by entertaining the revisioo petition directly ^ainst the order of Sub Divlstonal Officer v^ttiwit dlredtog the \/ ' : • • : • "; applications in the rewsion / respmdents No. 4 tp 7 to hnptead ttie ;wU f.r"" ^K - s-- Gram Panchayat s®the representerthfe twdy of the wnagerewrtiotisnre; moved objection before the Cotlector and to whom the notice issuedby the Sub Oiw^tmat Offteer was aiso endoreed invitti^ olqeiAion^. Leamed counsel has ateo urged that the oTdw has been paBsed wittiout heariTO themand is Uierefore not sustarinaMe. It hs®ateo bwn urged Uiat ctherwise, on merite ateo, the tands coutel nc< be ltte<t in favour of respondents No. 4 to 7 becsw^se the land ea^iert»]l!n^^Gi|h^ proprietor and Svsre ts no lawhil sdienaBon m few^ pt Ramridhl Pandey. (11) Leamed cainsd appeaBirg for respondents No. 4 to 7 have vehemwrtly argued that the ^ugn^ order does r^;|^|1(^|my interterence because the peUtioner was nct a n^^say fwtyjn the revteion as the aFplteatton under Sartton 57(2) of the Code is essenKdly a proceeding betweentheappUcarteandt^State anctthat even if ttie notfee was issued to tbe petifcmw by the Sub Divtyonat Offlcer, nrtMrg ha®been brQtght on record to sutwtenftatethad the petitioner had moved obpcUpn bef<we the Sub Divnstonsd Oflteer. Leamed counsete have submitted that in vtew <rf a long possessx and grant of tease by the Ex-Malgujar, the r^pondente au'8 CTrtitted to get their name recorded e®Bhumiswaml. C\2) Leamed State counsel has submittedftat'the revistonbett%ethe Board of Revenue was not mairtainabte as any partys^grieva;! by fte order of Sub Diviaorisd Offiwr ^ssed under Sectipn 57^ <rfJheCp^e can file a Civll Sult sub Section (3) of Section 57 and ss »K*»tiie revision shouki have been cfemtesed as n<A maBntamable. .^^•eai&iif'- r'' . •?.'.--*-sly:'' \. .^••' ./•• ,;;!ffii ^i^ 3>"" ^.•-i -£- (13) Admlttedly, ttie cwnersWp cif tt®land fcielor®tothe^roprisltcN-o? vilte©ePipraud on the date of grant ot tease on 24W-1948, ttre necessary consiequence of same is that the sytgect teod mysthave been a sutqect matter of proceedings wriwtaken by the Settlemeit Commissioner at the ttme <rf pasar^i an order under the jwov(^(»is; contained in Section 5 ofthe M.P. Abolitton of PKyrietartes Act, 1S|9!). (14) In <he preswrt case nothing hs®been brought on recor* by the resporKtents No. 4 to 7 who are d^iming entjtl^entfor recoreljf^their name in the revenue records and conferral of BhumiSN^BTW IR®WSto submit that by virtue of Vne tease yanted by ttie prqpri^or on 24-07-1949 ftw sub(ect lands were s^tled,tn Cawur of RamnKhl Pandtey and thereaftH- f^mnnidN Pandey had bwoiro cnwier of tt i land in his own right anS his name shoidd have been recorded as owner in the records. The fact that an application under Sectkm 57(2) of ttie Code has bewi nvwed by Rgnwwlhi Pandey or his l^at h^rs itself goes to si^e^ that there was a dtepute between the respondents No. 4to 7 and the Stsrte Government abputttie cwnershjp of the (and, meaning ^iereby that at the time of fes^ngvieoesssi'y orcters under ttie AberiiUon of Prqirtetary Rights Act, 1^& the lands have been dectered ve^ed in the State Govemment ard thafs why the tands were resordect as grass land in the revenue records (Anrwxure P)S) fried by the petitioner and in Annexure R/4 fiteel alwigwth rehim of responciente No. 5 & 7. Annexure RM is extract ofthe entries made in the encroachment register maintained for vjftgge Pipraud meaning thereby that the responderrts No. 4 to 7 were treated as encrowhere / by-the State authorities. ^ ^•-~\"1~*^ y''r~^ ~<^-A.;f.f (15) Since the land wa®recorded s»grass teutd awl was;ua^!|?faF gRcai^ of cattles of the vitegere, and since the mttee was »Rdors»dto Vns Gram Pancteyat, the p^itioner was neoessary party wd |Bie,&)a'd of Revenue has commttted a serious iltegality by (tecfetingttie revisaton withwit impteadH^ the petittoner. Thus, tt is fbundlhat the peBioner is entitled to mairtain this wit petttion even if the pe<8Uorw was not im^eacted in the revision before the Board of Revenue. (16) The respondente No. 4 to 7 have prefeireCI the reviNon be^qre the Board of Revenue under Section 90 <rf the Act. Provtep OMa) of sub-Sectton (1) of Sectton 50 of ttw Code prowdes ttWt no ap^toaiUpn for revision shalt be entertained agaln^ sm onler whteh te umter Ihe C«te. tt Iws not been stated by the responctenls No. 4 to 7 ttiat agi appeal sgainst the onter passed by ttw SiA) Di^Wond QfBc.er coirid nrt have been ffled under the proiviaons of tt Code, thus, when an appeal against ttie ordw oT Sub Dpriwmal CWssw wasmswfeitnaye, a revteion p^Btion coufcl nc< haw been fited and fn any caese sras not malntainable before the Bowd of Reveiwe. (17) tn wwi of what has t»en found above, the instant petWon aicceeds and te allowect. The hryugned oider paesed toyfteBosBd of Revenue is sel-asdte. Ttere shall be no order asto coste. SdJI^.(^wa ^f^ws^ I-