IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHA'ITISGARH AT BILASPUR c.G. WRIT PETITION (C) No. TOF 2010 // PETITIONER : Kailash Mishra Son of Late Shri Chandrashekhar Mishra, aged about 45 years, Resident of Godhanpur, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.). VERSUS RESPONDENTS : 17/ State of Chhattisgarh,through the Secretary, Department of Revenue, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.). 2. Board of Revenue, through its Chairman, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.). 3. (The Collector, Surguja (Ambikapur), District Surguja (C.G.). 4f, The Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.). 5. Dr. Jitendra Kumar Singh Son of Late Purushottam Singh, aged about 55 years, Occupation Doctor, Resident of Chopdapara, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.)., WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1. PARTICULARS OF THE PETITIONER As given in the cause title. / Single Bench: Hon’ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra g Shri V.K.Pandey, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Ajay Dwivedi, Deputy Government Advocate for the State/respondents No.1, 3 and 4. t? Writ Petition under Articie 226 of the Constitution of lndia ORAL ORDER (Passed on 28‘“ October, 2010) Heard on admission. 2. Grievance of the petitioner is that the Board of Revenue has passed an interim-order on 11-8-2009 in favour of respondent No.5. The petitioner has made an application for vacating the interim order and is making repeated prayer before the Board of Revenue for taking up the application for hearing and has made severai applications for urgent hearing. Copy of the application for vacating the interim order has been placed on record of the writ petition. a. a» .< 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in spite of efforts being made, the Board of Revenue is not taking up the - application for vacating the interim order and neither prayer for ../ “ ' vacating interim order nor the revision is"decided. Petitioner versus Respondents State of Chhattisgarh and others Present: 2 4. In view of the limited prayer made in this writ petition, it is directed that the Board of Revenue shall do well to take up the application for vacating interim order preferred by the petitioner and decide the same within a period of one month from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order or to decide the revision itself finally within the said period. lf the Board of Revenue fails to take up the application for vacating interim order or to decide the revision nnally within the stipulated period of one month, the petitioner shall be at liberty to move this Court afresh. 5. With the aforesaid observations, the instant writ petition is disposed of. V Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge Sdl- Gopal