1. Challenging orders Annexure P-19 dated 23.8.2012 passed by the Board of Revenue, Annexure P-18 dated 28.2.2012 passed by the Commissioner, Narmadapuram Division, Hoshangabad and the order Annexure P-16 dated 31.8.2009 passedy the Tahsildar (Revenue) Harda in a proceedings held before him under section 250 of the M.P. Land Revenue Code, this writ petition has been filed.

2. Respondents No. 5 to 7 initiated the proceedings against the present petitioners before the Tahsildar (Revenue) Harda under section 250 of the M.P. Land Revenue Code for restoration of their possession on the ground that they are Bhumi-Swami of the land and have been illegally dispossessed. It was the case of respondents No.5 to 7 that respondent No.5 Poonam Chand is owner of land bearing Khasra No.138/3, respondent No. 7 Smt. Malka Bai is owner of land bearing Khasra No.140/1 and respondent No.6 Shri Raju is owner of land bearing Khasra No.142, all situated in village Domanau, Tahsil and District Harda. It was the case of all these persons that towards the eastern side of their property/land, as indicated hereinabove, is situated a land bearing Khasra No.143/4 which is recorded in the name of present petitioner Shri Murlidhar and petitioner No.2 Shri Ramkishore is in joint possession with Shri Murlidhar. It is stated that petitioner No.1 appears to have given land to petitioner No.2 by way of partition.

3. In the proceedings held under section 250 of the M.P. Land Revenue Code, respondents No.5 to 7 came out with a case that in the year 2006 they were given to understand that part of the land situated in the eastern side which belongs to they is under encroachment and, therefore, one of their family member Smt Leela Bai filed an application before the Tahsildar (Revenue) in the year 2006-2007 for demarcation under section 129 and it was contended by her that in the land belonging to family on the eastern side some encroachment have been done by the petitioners. The Tahsildar (Revenue) Harda registered this case for demarcation of land bearing Khasra No.136/2 and 137/2, spot inspection was undertaken, a map was prepared and a report was submitted in which it was found that petitioner No.1 is in illegal possession of an area measuing 0.88 acres in Khasra No.138/3, 0.36 acres in Khasra No.140/1 and 0.38 acres in Khasra No.142. The aforesaid report was submitted by the Tahsildar vide Annexure P-3 and based on the aforesaid report of demarcation submitted vide Annexure P-3 it is seen that the proceedings were initiated by the respondents No. 5 to 7 under section 250 of the M.P. Land Revenue Code. The report of demarcation Annexure P-3 is dated 6.9.2007 and the application for restoration of possession under section 250 was filed on 3.10.2007.

4. Be that as it may be, proceedings under section 250 was held and based on the report of demarcation, the Tehsildar vide his order Annexure P-16 dated 31.8.2009 came to the conclusion that petitioners are encroaching on certain area of land held by respondents family and, therefore, directed for restoration of possession exercising powers under section 250. The Tahsildar accepted the demarcation proceedings and recorded the finding by holding that the proceedings under section 250 has been initiated within the time prescribed under law.

5. Challenging the aforesaid order Annexure P-16 passed by the Tahsildar First Appeal was filed by the petitioners before the Sub Divisional Officer and vide order Annexure P-17 dated 21.6.2010 the Sub Divisional Officer Harda reversed the findings of the Tahsildar and set aside the order of demarcation and ordered for restoration of possession mainly on the ground that there are various irregularity in the order passed by the Tahsildar vide Annexure P-3 and, therefore, based on the demarcation the action taken under section 250 is unsustainable. It was also found that notice to the petitioner No.2 was not issued in the proceedings held under section 129. Further findings recorded was