2026:CGHC:10635 Digitally signed by AFR YOGESH YOGESH TIWARI TIWARI Date:

2026.02.28 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

18:13:18 +0530 Order Reserved on : 23.01.2026 Order Delivered on : 28.02.2026 WPS No. 7497 of 2023 Pardeshi Ram S/o Late Khelandas Aged About 50 Years R/o Village-

Ganiyari, Tahsil- Nawagarh, District Bemetara (Chhattisgarh)

... Petitioner versus

1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Panchayat And Rural Development Department, Mantralaya Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

2 - The Board of Revenue Bilaspur, Circuit Court, Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

3 - The Commissioner, Durg Division, District Durg (Chhattisgarh)

4 - The Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Nawagarh, District Bemetara (Chhattisgarh)

5 - The Tahsildar, Nawagarh, District Bemetara (Chhattisgarh)

6 - Rambihari Sahu S/o Tirithram Sahu, R/o Village Ganiyari, Tahsil Nawagarh, District Bemetara (Chhattisgarh)

... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System)

Hon'ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge

C A V Order

1. This petition pertains to the appointment of a Kotwar under Section 230 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as “the Code, 1959”) and the Rules framed thereunder. A Kotwar appointed under Section 230 of the Code, 1959 is a civil servant, and such appointment is made within the jurisdiction of the Tahsildar/Additional Tahsildar/Naib Tahsildar. The Code, 1959 specifically provides for the appointment of Kotwars, prescribes their duties, and is supplemented by Rules governing their appointment, punishment, removal, and functions.

2. The petitioner has assailed the impugned order dated 23.06.2023 passed by the Chhattisgarh Board of Revenue, Bilaspur, Circuit Court Raipur, whereby the review application bearing No.RW23/R/A-59/137/2021 preferred by him was dismissed. The Board of Revenue held that the petitioner failed to point out any error apparent on the face of the record as contemplated under Section 51 of the Code, 1959 read with Order XLVII Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure. It was further held that no material was placed on record so as to justify review of the earlier order dated 16.07.2021 passed by the Board of Revenue.

3. The petitioner has filed the instant writ petition with the following relief(s) :-

“10.1 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, thereby setting-aside/quashing the impugned order dated 23.06.2023 (Annexure P/1) and further be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to appoint the petitioner on the post of Kotwar, Gram Panchayat, Ganiyari, in accordance with law.

10.2 That, any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including award of the costs of the petition may be given.”

4. Brief facts for disposal of the instant writ petition are that, the petitioner’s father, Khelan Das Panika, was serving as Kotwar of Village Ganiyari and passed away on 06.11.2010. Following his death, applications were invited to fill the vacant post. The Gram Panchayat recommended the petitioner. Despite that, the Tahsildar initially appointed Laxman Singh as Kotwar. The petitioner challenged this appointment, but before the case could be decided, Laxman Singh passed away, and the matter was dismissed.

5. The Tahsildar issued a fresh proclamation for appointment. Both the petitioner and respondent No. 6 applied. Respondent No. 6 was appointed, which was challenged before the Sub Divisional Officer (SDO). The SDO found that the proper procedure under Rule 4(1) & (2) and Section 230 Cr.P.C. was not followed, including absence of Gram Panchayat recommendation and character certificate from the police, and remanded the matter for reconsideration. Respondent No. 6 preferred an appeal before the Commissioner, who allowed it. The petitioner challenged the Commissioner’s order before the Board of Revenue, which, by order dated 16.07.2021, dismissed the petitioner’s revisio