®iMftSF BFMC?' SSNVi-S; E.i-.r'w^ ^?-^'vsv^ ^ J'1> (L^ [^ INTHE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.(C) N0. 6 ^ 2-3 / 2006 Petitioner / .V Rajesh Kumar Verma S/0 Late Shri Brijlal Verma Aged about 39 years N\ ^•"Ay .^ R/ O Vill. Palari •^^^•'•:'I:^"-..--"" ^^••-""' .^J.-' >""^"^IA>' ^- Q^" »*•••" Respondents At present: Choubey Colony Raipur Distt. Raipur (C.G.) Versus Board OfRevenue Circuit Court Raipur (C.G.) The Additional Collector Baloda Bazar Distt. Raipur (C.G.) The TehsUdar Palari Distt. Raipur (C.G.) Omprakash Khunte S/0 Shri Punitram Khunte Anuradha D/0 Shri Punitram Khunte Amamath S/0 Shri Punitram Khunte Res. No. 4to6 R/0 Vill. Palari Teh. Palari Distt. Raipur R.K.Chandrakar S/0 Shri R. Chandrakar R/0 KatoraTalab Raipur Teh.& Distt. Raipur(C.G.) WRIT PETITION U/A 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA /if'^-\^' . \ _^- ^:y. ^\ ^ 4 <^ly' •^y^^ €^ • t^>' ' 5. < 6. 7. XI-HC-78 3TI^T??rR-<i* gwsn^TSiire *11*1MI Sh+lich s'ar'^raicpr, »T!1u'is,Ricfiyy y^. Jt/. .1.;. ^lp.... ^32^/^- 200 ^ SH^T 4a«n(lyIg'st<i'ST) s^nwflte'sfi^r Shri PrafuU Bharat, Heard. The petitioner has file( dated 31.07.2006 of Aiuiesl whereby the revision preferrj order of Additional Collector.l and tlie inatter has been ri Pallari for final. orders m. ffal betaveen the paities. Leamed coriiisel for t] disposiag of tlie revenue proc| inade bv fhe Board ofrevenij title of fhe petitioner as Civil Second Additional District parties with respect to fhe Board of revenue inentions has alreadv been decided bv contrari' to the inaterial inipugned order deseives to b| I have heard leai-ned co) I have'' perused the itu|] fhat brotb.er of the petitioner ia favour of resuondents No. t leai|iied counsel for the petitioner. jl tliis petition agaiiist fb.e order (ure P/3 of Boarcl of Revenue •d by tlie petitioner agaia.st the Baloda Bazar has been rejected tmanded back to the Tahsildar, nilltation proceedings pendiag qiiiifciifl-i Hii<iTfffei<fl <Rit<;i< ^srf^lTSn^T l|ie petitioner subinits fhat while •ediags certain observations were which inav adverselv affect fhe puit is already pendiag before the ;e, Baloda Bazar between the |lispllted laiid. The order of the the tifle of fhe disputed land coinpetent Givil Court which is on record aad fherefore fhe quashed. ^insel for the petitioner. |3ugned order. It is aot clisputed |.iad traasferred fhe disputed laad ft to7 and the application fitedby Jhd that tfie available P.T.O. XI-HC-78 an^rqiTRaN; (W 3TI^?T giirii 1- <-. .^a" \v\ HI*I^ ai*n^» S^'^raRFT, OTn'y'is, Rldiy^ .U'.(?.C^...<<.7.^/. W[ 2QO£ 311^1 Msiq> (li'*Idct'i,8T) ^TBiwgfN'sn^T —2.. tbe petitioner for grant of tei ffcte trial Court. The petitione; of Second Additional Distnci brother as also agauast respi of his title over tlie suit application fof teinporary iaj reiected. C^asidering fbe fact ti| is penduig before the leamei^ Baloda Bazar in which the adjudicated fhis Court is o\ jiuisdictioa exercised by thj fhe. impugned order shall grave hijusti.ee which caUs f<| Article 227 of the Consti.ti( reasons the petitLon is herebj ^pffepfrr HTR??F ffte^ (^reerc ^TSrf^ITSfD^T jiporaiy iajunction was rejected by has filcd a Civil Suit ui fh.e Court Judge, Baloda Bazar against liis bndents No. 4 to 7 for declaration IIaad ancl ia the said siiit fhe ^nction by the petiuoaer has been iliat fhe suit for declaration of title Second Additional District Judge, title of fhe disputed land is to be the considered opiaion tliat the Board of reveaue while passui; jiot occasion. failure of justice or |ir iaterference bv fhis Court under ition of India. For the aforesaid disiaissed. Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge P.T.O.