ORDER

1. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed challenging the orders dated 14.11.2017 passed by the Board of Revenue in revision No. 2364-1/16 and order dated 13.6.2019 passed by the Board of Revenue in case No.1/Review/Vidisha/LR/2018/0088.

2. The necessary facts for the disposal of the present petition in short are that a committee constituted under the leadership of Revenue Inspector had submitted a report dated 7.5.1982 in which it was mentioned that survey No. 27 area 1.087 hectare, survey No. 34 area 2.049 hectare, survey No. 64 area 0.293 hectare and survey No. 66 area 0.575 hectare, total area 4.004 hectare were recorded in the name of Butaiya (dead), Phulla, Bera, Chunni, Seva and Halka S/o Butaiya. All these persons are the members of aboriginal tribe and now the above-mentioned land is in possession of Krishnagopal S/o Amarchand, who is not the member of aboriginal tribe. Accordingly, the proceeding under section 170-B of M.P. Land Revenue Code (in short "the Code") was initiated. The petitioners are the legal representatives of Krishnagopal. The proceedings under section 170- B of the Code was dismissed by the Sub Divisional Officer, Vidisha by order dated 17.8.2009. The respondents No. 1 to 17 filed an appeal against the order of the SDO, Vidisha. The Additional Collector, Vidisha by order dated 22.9.2015 passed in case No.7/Appeal/2012- 13 allowed the appeal and it was held that since the members of the aboriginal tribe were owner of the property in dispute and as the petitioners have failed to notify as to how they came in possession of the land belonging to the members of the aboriginal tribe, therefore, it was directed that the land be reverted back to the respondents No. 1 to 17.

3. Being aggrieved by the order of the Additional Collector, Vidisha, the petitioners filed a revision before the Board of Revenue, which was dismissed by order dated 14.11.2017. An application for review was filed which too has been dismissed by order dated 13.6.2019.

4. Challenging the order passed by the Board of Revenue as well as the Additional Collector, Vidisha, it is submitted by the counsel for the petitioners that by mistake the revision was filed directly before the Board of Revenue and in fact the revision was maintainable before the Commissioner, Bhopal Division, Bhopal, therefore, the Board of Revenue should not have entertained the revision, which was filed directly before it. It is further submitted by the counsel for the petitioners that the question of title is involved in the present and, therefore, the revenue authorities had no right or power to direct for reversion of the land back to the respondents No. 1 to 17. The respondents No. 1 to 17 have failed to prove their title and, therefore, the orders passed by the Additional Collector as well as Board of Revenue are liable to be quashed.

5. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

6. Section 170-B of the Code 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 the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code (Amendment), 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 subsection (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.

(2) If any person fails to notify the information as required by subsection (1) within the period specified therein it shall be presumed that such person has been in possession of the agricultural land without any lawful authority and the agricultural land shall, on the exp