SANJAY K. AGRAWAL, J.

1. Since common question of law and fact are involved in these three writ petitions, they are heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.

2. Mr. Kripa Sindhu Gond was original holder of the lands situated at Village Bhukel, District Mahasamund, original Petitioner-Jagat Ram purchased the land bearing Kh.No.461/3 area 0.34 acre by registered sale deed dated 22.1.1994, petitioner-Nain Singh purchased the land bearing Kh.No.315 area 0.83 hectare by registered sale deed dated 1.2.1986 and petitioner-Safed Kumar purchased the land bearing Kh.No.168 area 0.23 hectare by registered sale deed dated 28.6.1989 from original land holder Kripa Sindhu. Thereafter, his widow Smt. Shyam Kunwar filed a complaint to the Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Saraipali for reverting back the land, which was dismissed on 16.8.1999. Repeat complaint was made by Smt.Shyam Kunwar to the Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Saraipali and this time, the Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Saraipali by order dated 15.1.2001 directed the land to be reverted to Smt.Shyam Kunwar. The petitioners preferred appeals before the Collector against that order. The Collector dismissed the appeals, against which, they preferred the revisions, which were also dismissed by the Board of Revenue. Now petitioners-Jagat Ram, Nain Singh and Safed Kumar being aggrieved against the orders of the Sub Divisional Officer (R.) as affirmed by the Collector and the Board of Revenue have filed these writ petitions under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

3. Mr. S.N. Nande, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in WP No.700 of 2006, would submit that the original petitioner having purchased the land by registered sale deed dated 22.1.1994 whereas Section 170-B (1) of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 (hereinafter called as 'Code') would not be applicable as the said provision is applicable to the transaction entered into with effect from 2.10.1959 to 24.10.1980 and information was required to be notified up to 23.10.1982. Since the provision itself is not applicable, the orders of the Sub-Divisional Officer (R.) as affirmed by the Collector and the Sub Divisional Officer deserve to be quashed.

4. Mr. Raghvendra Pradhan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in WPC Nos. 3404 of 2007 and 3477 of 2007, adopted the arguments advanced by Mr. Nande and prays for similar relief.

5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, considered their rival submissions made hereinabove and also gone through the record with utmost circumspection.

6. In order to decide the dispute raised at the Bar, it would be appropriate to notice Section 170-B (1) of the Code which reads as under :-

"170-B. Reversion of land of members of aboriginal tribe which was transferred by fraud.-(1) Every person who on the date of commencement of Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code (Amendment) Act, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as the Amendment Act of 1980) is in possession of agricultural land which belonged to a member of a tribe which has been declared to be an aboriginal tribe under sub-section (6) of section 165 between the period commencing on the 2nd October, 1959 and ending on the date of the commencement of Amendment Act, 1980 shall, within two years of such commencement, notify to the Sub-Divisional Officer in such form and in such manner as may be prescribed, all the information as to how he has come in possession of such land."

7. A careful perusal of Section 170-B (1) of the Code would show that person in possession on the date of commencement of the Amendment Act of 1980 i.e. 24.10.1980 of the agricultural land belonging to a member of aboriginal tribe is required to notify to the Sub Divisional Officer within two years from 24.10.1980 in the manner prescribed that how he came into possession of such land.

8. The question as to the applicability of Section 170-B of the Code was referred to a Division Bench on account of diversion view. The