Mohd. Ashraf Qureshi v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (C) No. 5288 of 2021 Mohd. Ashraf Qureshi S/o Haji Mohd. Hanif Qureshi, Aged About 61 Years, R/o Civil Colony Mugal Bazar, Post And Thana Kharsiya, District- Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Revenue Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralay, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Sudama Yadav S/o Bali Ram Yadav, Aged About 65 Years, R/o Khalpara, Narmadapur, Police Station Kamleshwarpur, Tahsil Sitapur, District- Surguja, Chhattisgarh

3. Mahbub Shah S/o Late Awlad Saha, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Village Sur, Police Station And Tahsil Sitapur, Disrict- Surguja, Chhattisgarh

4. Tahsildar, Tahsil Office At Mainpat, District- Surguja, Chhattisgarh

5. SHO, Police Station Sitapur, District- Surguja, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Ashok Patil, Advocate For State :

Ms. Akanksha Jain, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 20.12.2021

1. The grievance of petitioner in the present writ petition seems to be the mutation proceedings initiated by the respondent no.4 under Sections 109 & 110 of Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code.

2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the respondent no.4 ought to have considered the fact that the dispute already stands decided

by the Civil Court and has also been finally decided at the stage of Second Appeal and therefore the mutation proceedings at the behest of respondents 2 & 3 would not be maintainable.

3. Be that as it may, since there is no order as such passed by the respondent no.4 in the mutation proceedings, the writ petition at this juncture stands disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to approach the respondent no.4 and apprise him in respect of the Civil Suit as also the decisions up till the stage of second appeal. The respondent no.4 in turn is expected to take an appropriate decision keeping in view all these facts & the contentions of the petitioner while deciding the mutation proceedings. The respondent no.4 would take an appropriate decision in accordance with law after due scrutiny of the documents and the contentions which the petitioner shall be bringing to the notice of respondent no.4, within an outer limit of 4 months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Khatai