Dismissal of a revision petition for want of prosecution does not warrant intervention in a writ petition; the appropriate remedy is to file a restoration application before the original forum while maintaining the status quo in the interim.

Order on Board

1. Heard.

2. Present is a writ petition filed by the petitioner under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the legality, propriety and correctness of the order dated 30.04.2026 passed by the learned Board of Revenue, Circuit Court at Raipur, Chhattisgarh in Case No. RN/08/R/A-27/325/2024 whereby the revision of the petitioner under Section 50 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code has been dismissed for want of prosecution.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier the Board of Revenue has entertained the revision under Section 50 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code and vide order dated 07.01.2025, the learned Board of Revenue was kind enough to pass an order of status quo in favour of the petitioner for the period of one month, and thereafter, it was continued till 10.06.2025 and the matter was fixed for final hearing which is apparent from the order sheet dated 22.09.2025 passed by the Board of Revenue. Further, on 06.10.2025, the concerned advocates were directed to file their written arguments and subsequently, when the presiding officer was changed, the matter was again listed for final hearing. Ultimately, vide order dated 30.04.2026, since no representation was made on behalf of the petitioner before the learned Board of Revenue, the case was dismissed for want of prosecution. He further submits that he was going to file an application for restoration of his revision, however, in the meanwhile on 15.05.2026, an application under Section 109 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code was filed for mutation as such the petitioner has approached before this Court for passing any appropriate order so that his interest may not be frustrated.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material annexed with the petition.

5. Considering the totality of the case without entering into the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that since the order of status quo has earlier been granted in favour of the petitioner by the concerned Board of Revenue and further, since the revision was dismissed for want of prosecution, as such no case is made out for grant of any relief in favour of the petitioner, however, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, that earlier an order of status quo was granted by the Board of Revenue, in the interest of justice, the petitioner is directed to approach before the concerned Board of Revenue by filing an appropriate application for restoration of his case within 07 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6. It is further directed that no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner till the filing of his restoration application before the concerned Board of Revenue.

7. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the present writ petition is disposed of.

8. Pending Interlocutory Applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.