Satyapal Ratre v. State Of Chhattisgah

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 459 of 2018 Satyapal Ratre S/o Shri Dwarika Prasad, Aged About 30 Years, Panch Of Ward No. 3, R/o Village Khaira, Post Podi, Janpad Panchayat Kota Tahsil Kota, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgah Through Secretary, Urban Administration Department Mahanadi Bhavan Mantralaya New Raipur District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. The Additional Collector, Bilaspur District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

3. Shiv Kumar Raj S/o Shri Mahesh Ram Raj, Aged About 50 Years, Ex Sarpanch Gram Panchayat Khaira Janpad Panchayat Kota Tahsil Kota District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

4. Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Janpad Panchayat Kota Tahsil Kota District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

5. Nayab Tahsildar Ratanpur Tahsil Kota District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

6. Meghnath Suman Secretary Gram Panchayat Khaira Vikaskhand Kota Tahsil Kota District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Vikrant Pillay, Advocate.

For Respondents/State :

Mr. Shashank Thakur, Govt. Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 20/02/18 1.

This writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner being aggrieved by the order dated 28.12.2017 (Annexure - P/1) passed by respondent No. 2 - Additional Collector, Bilaspur, whereby the appeal preferred by respondent No. 3 has been allowed.

2.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the impugned order has been passed without authority of law and without jurisdiction.

3.

Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of State would submit that the order passed by the Additional Collector, Bilaspur is revisable before the Commissioner (Revenue), Bilaspur.

4.

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that he may be allowed to prefer such an appeal before the Commissioner (Revenue), Bilaspur.

5.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties. 6.

Be that as it may, the petitioner would be at liberty to prefer an appeal before the Commissioner (Revenue), Bilaspur in accordance with law within a period of two weeks from today and that will be considered and decided by the Commissioner (Revenue), Bilaspur expeditiously within a further period of four weeks after hearing the parties.

7.

With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands finally disposed of. No order as to cost(s).

8.

Certified copy of the impugned order be returned to the counsel for the petitioner on furnishing attested photo copy thereof. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Priyanka