IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GURPAL SINGH AHLUWALIA ON THE 8 th OF SEPTEMBER, 2023 MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No. 2195 of 2021 BETWEEN:-

1. RAMSWAROOP S/O RAMPRASAD CHAMAR, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST R/O VILLAGE TORIA TEHSIL RAJNAGAR DISTRICT CHHATARPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

2. DURJAN S/O RAM PRASAD CHAMAR, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST R/O VILLAGE TORIA, TEH. RAJNAGAR, DISTRICT CHHATARPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....PETITIONER (BY SHRI R.S. JAISWAL – SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH SHRI K.K. GAUTAM -

ADVOCATE )

AND

1. THE ADDL. COMMISSIONER SAGAR DIVISION SAGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

2. MAGAN S/O THOVAN YADAV, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST R/O VILLAGE TORIA, TEHSIL RAJNAGAR, DISTRICT CHHATARPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

3. SHANKAR S/O THOVAN YADAV, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST R/O VILLAGE TORIA, TEHSIL RAJNAGAR, DISTRICT CHHATARPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

4. LAKHAN S/O THOVAN YADAV, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, OCCUPATION:

AGRICULTURIST R/O VILLAGE TORIA, TEHSIL RAJNAGAR, DISTRICT CHHATARPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENTS (SHRI NAVEEN DUBEY – GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.1/STATE, SHRI RAMAKANT AWASTHI – ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENTS NO.2 AND 4 )

............................................................................................................................................

This petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following:

ORDER

This Petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India has been filed against orders dated 15.03.2019, 12.09.2019, 02.03.2020 passed by Additional Commissioner, Sagar Division, Sagar and Board of Revenue in Revision No.528/A-6A/2009-10, case No. Revision/0518/2018/Chhatarpur/MPLRC and Review No.01058/2019/Chhatarpur/MPLRC respectively.

2. It is the case of petitioners that they are landless persons and were allotted Patta of Government land bearing Khasra No.304 situated in village Toria, Tahsil Rajnagar, District Chhatarpur. Respondents No.2 to 4 never raised objection before Tahsildar but challenged the allotment in appeal before SDO, Rajnagar, District Chhatarpur, which was dismissed by order dated 12.05.2010. Against the order of SDO, respondents preferred a revision before Additional Commissioner. Respondents No.2 to 4 thereafter filed an application for correction of record after 10 years. Additional Commissioner Sagar Division, Sagar by order dated 15.03.2019 allowed the revision No.528/A-6A/2009-10 and held that 2.679 hectares of land forming part of Khasra No.304 was an ancestral property of respondents No.2 to 4 and Patwari had committed a mistake in preparing the roster and while allotting Patta to petitioners, area of

0.809 hectares belonging to ancestral property of respondents No.2 to 4, has also been included.

3. Being aggrieved by order passed by Additional Commissioner, Sagar Division, Sagar, petitioners preferred a revision before Board of Revenue, which was dismissed by order dated 12.09.2019 on the ground of maintainability. Thereafter, petitioners filed a review petition against order dated 12.09.2019 passed by Board of Revenue, which too has been dismissed.

4. Challenging the orders passed by authorities below, it is submitted by counsel for petitioners that Patta was allotted to petitioners on 28.05.1999, whereas application under Sections 115 and 116 was filed after 10 long years. The correction cannot be made after one year and application under Section 115 was not maintainable after a considerable long period. Since, provisions of Section 116 completely prohibits the correction of entry after one year, therefore, application itself was barred by time. The allotment order has already attained finality and right has been created in favour of petitioners and therefore, they cannot be divested by Revenue Court. Only Civil Court has a jurisdiction to decide the rights of parties.

5. Per contra, counsel for respondents has submitted that authorities below have come to a conclusion that ini