← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPC/1877/2018disposed off

Mahesh Rawal v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2018-07-11Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 1877 of 2018

1. Mahesh Rawal S/o Rastu Ram, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Village- Sulanga, Tahsil And District- Naruyanpur, Chhattisgarh.

2. Dinesh Rawal S/o Rastu, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Village- Sulanga, Tahsil And District- Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioners

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Secretary, Revenue Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Collector Narayanpur, District- Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh.

3. Sub Divisional Officer Revenue, Narayanpur, District- Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh.

4. Tahsildar Narayanpur, Narayanpur, District- Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh.

5. Chief Muncipal Officer Nagar Panchayat Narayanpur, District- Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh.

--- Respondents For Petitioners :

Mr. Basant Kaiwartya, Advocate.

For Respondent / State :

Mr. Avinash Singh, Panel Lawyer.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 11/07/18 1.

This writ petition has been preferred by the petitioners being aggrieved against the order dated 16.03.2017 (Annexure - P/2) passed by respondent No. 4 - Tahsildar.

2.

Learned State counsel would submit that the order passed by the Tahsildar on 16.03.2018 under Section 248 of the Land Revenue Code is appealable before the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue). 3.

Be that as it may, since the order of Tahsildar is appealable before the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue), the petitioners would be at liberty to prefer an appeal before the concerned revenue authority in accordance with the

provisions contained under Section 44 of the Land Revenue Code and also to seek interim stay by filing application.

If such an appeal is preferred by the petitioners then the SubDivisional Officer (Revenue) will do well to consider and decide the appeal expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

4.

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

SD/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Priyanka