IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL DHAGAT ON THE 09^th OF MAY, 2022 WRIT PETITION No. 8041 of 2022 Between:-

1. GOPESH S/O BAMAN PRASAD PANDEY , AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCCUPATION: PANCHAYAT SECRETARY DUBGANWA, TEHSIL HANUMANA DISTRICT REWA (MADHYA PRADESH)

2. CHANDRA BHUSHAN S/O KESHARI PRASAD PANDEY , AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST R/O NAUNKALA, TEHSIL- HANUMANA, DSITRICT-

REWA, M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....PETITIONER (BY SHRI S.D. MISHRA, ADVOCATE)

AND

1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH ITS SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT MANTRALAYA VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

2. ADDICTIONAL COLLECTOR, REWA DISTRICT- REWA, (M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH)

3. SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER, (REVENUE) SUB DIVISION HANUMANA, DISTRICT- REWA, M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)

4. TEHSILDAR TEHSIL HANUMANA, DISTRICT-

REWA, M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)

5. AWDHESH PRATAP SINGH S/O SHRI SHANKAR SINGH R/O BANNA JAWAHAR SINGH, TEHSIL- HANUMANA, DISTRICT-

REWA, M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)

6. BADRI NARAYAN SINGH S/O SHRI SHANKAR SINGH R/O BANNA JAWAHAR SINGH, TEHSIL- HANUMANA, DISTRICT- REWA, M.P.

(MADHYA PRADESH)

7. KAILASH PATI SINGH S/O MANBAHORAN SINGH R/O BEERADEI, TEHSIL HANUMANA, DISTRICT- REWA, M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)

8. FATEBAHADUR SINGH S/O SHANKAR SINGH R/O TELIHA NIRMOHI SINGH, TEHSIL- HANUMANA, DISTRICT- REWA, M.P.

(MADHYA PRADESH)

9. KRISHNA BAHADUR SINGH S/O SHANKAR SINGH R/O TELIHA NIRMOHI SINGH, TEHSIL- HANUMANA, DISTRICT- REWA, M.P.

(MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI S.P. MISHRA, CAVEATOR AND SHRI V.P. TIWARI, GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

This petition has come up for hearing on this day, the court passed the following:

ORDER

Petitioners have filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging order dated 25.03.2022 contained in Annexure-P/10 passed by respondent No.2 in Revision No.186/revision/2021-2022. By impugned order revision was dismissed on the ground that same was barred under Section 50 sub-section 2(c) of MP Land Revenue Code and Principle of res-judicata.

Brief facts of the case are that in Case No.268/A-74/2008-09 order was passed on 07.01.2010 directing tracing of map as per report of Patwari. Said order was challenged in appeal and thereafter, revision was also filed and same was decided. After passing of aforesaid order, Tehsildar, Hanumana passed order for tracing of map vide order dated 08.02.2010 in Case No.15- A-74/2009-10. Said order was challenged in first appeal before SDO after period of 11 years. SDO dismissed the first appeal on ground of limitation vide its order dated 04.03.2022. Being aggrieved by the order of SDO, revision was filed before Upper Collector, Rewa which was dismissed vide order dated 05.03.2022 on the ground that principle of res-judicata is applicable and same is not maintainable.

Petitioners in this petition have assailed the impugned order on the ground that principle of res-judicata is not applicable as petitioners were not party to the proceedings. Proceeding was done behind the back of petitioners without providing them opportunity of hearing and SDO had committed an error of law in rejecting application for condonation of delay. On aforesaid submission, counsel for petitioner submitted that order passed by authority in revision is bad in law and deserves to be set aside.

Respondents had supported the order passed by Upper Collector in revision and submitted that revision has rightly been dismissed by the Upper Collector.

Heard the counsel for the parties.

After considering facts and circumstances of the case, it is found that Tehsildar, Hanumana vide its order dated 08.02.2010 in Case No.15-A- 74/2009-10 has only complied with order dated 07.01.2010 which was passed in earlier Case No.268/A-74/2008-09. Said order has attained finality. Since, order of Tehsildar, Hanumana is not an original order but an order passed on basis of earlier order, therefore, no appeal will lie against said order. Under Section 44 of MP Land Revenue Code appeal is provided again