PETITIONER RESPONDENTSI 8. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH: B!LASPUR WRIT PETITION (227) NO. 4461 OF 2008 Shriramji Swami Nagridas Temple, Through Mahant Govind Sharan Das. SawarakarlTrustee, Through : Aam Mukhtiyar Shyam Sunder Das, ‘Saurabh' Guru Sarvarakar Mahant Govind Sharan Das, aged about 34 years, R/o Sarswati Chowk, Purani Basti, Ramchandra Swami Nagridas Temple, Raipur (CG). Versus Smt. Manju Krishnani, Wdlo Late Dayal Krishnani, Rlo Bhoi Para, Purani'Basti, Raipur (CG). Mritunjay Dubey, S/o Not in knowledge of the petitioner, R/o 159, Sundar Nagar, Raipur, Tahsii & Distt. Raipur (CG). Ramnarayan, S/o Domar (Dead) Rambishai, S/o Domar (Dead). Smt. Reja, Wdlo Domar (Dead). Si.No.3 to 5 are Rlo Purani Basti, Raipur (CG). Rijhumal, S/o Jeumai Sindhi (Dead), Rlo Bhoipara. Purani Basti, Raipur (CG). Sunder Nagar Grih Nirman Prathmik Sahkari Sanstha Maryadit, Raipur. through its President, Sunil Tiwari, Slo Chandraprakash‘Sharma (Dead). The State of Chhattisgarh, through the Collector, Raipur (CG). (Writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of indie) Single Bench: Hon’ble Shri Satish K.¥Agnihotri, J. Present : Shri S.C. Verma, counsei for the petitioner. Shri Shashank Thakur. Panel Lawyer for the State ORAL ORDE (Passed on this 18 day of August, 2008) Learned counsei appearing forthe petitioner submits that the Board of Revenue has no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal against the order dated 7-11—2007 (Annexure-Pi’i) passed by the Collector & Registrar, Public Trust, Raipur, in revenue case Nam/5.11 3(4)I2007-08. He further submits that the petitioner has raised an objection with regard to maintainability of the appeal, but without hearing the case of the petitioner, @ the Board of Revenue passed the interim order granting status quo with regard to property in dispute contrary to the order dated 7-1 1-2007 péssed by the competent Court of Registrar, Public Trust, Raipur. 2) Learned counsel appearing for the State submits that ends of justice would be sewed if the Board of Revenue is directed to consider the question raised by the petitioner with regard to maintainability and on merit also as expeditiously as possible. 3) It is not necessary to issue notice to private respondents Le. respondents No.1 to 7, as no ordet has been passed on metit, but only direction is issued to the Board of Revenue to consider and decide the matter expeditiously that may not be opposed by the other respondents. Thus, this petition is disposed of with a direction to consider and decide the pending appeal No.A/14IPTIB-1 13(4)l365/2007 (Sunder Nagar Grih Nirman Samiti Maryadit, Raipur vs. Shri Mritunjay Dubey & Others) as expeditiously as possible. However, it is made clear that if the respondents No.1 to 7 have any grievances they may tile an application for review of this order. 4) Consequently, l.A.No.1 for grant of interim relief also stands disposed of. satish K. Agnihotri; Judge Sd/' 1. Gowri 4 i ’1 /