1

AFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

W.P.(227) No.

688

of 2015

Order Reserved on 14.07.2021

Order Delivered on 22.07.2021

Smt. Meena Bai W/o Late Krishna Kumar Aged About 45 Years R/o Village

Mudhena, Tahsil Mahasamund, District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. Smt. Kalyani Bai W/o Late Shankar Devdas, Aged About 41 Years R/o

Village Mudena, Tahsil and District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh.

2. Minor Sangeeta D/o Late Shankar Devdas, Aged About 15 Years Minor

Through Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Kalyani Bai, R/o Village Mudena,

Tahsil And District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh.

3. Minor Radhik S/o Late Shankar Devdas, Aged About 13 Years Minor

Through Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Kalyani Bai, R/o Village Mudena,

Tahsil And District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh.

4. Minor Vandana D/o Late Shankar Devdas, Aged About 11 Years Minor

Through Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Kalyani Bai, R/o Village Mudena,

Tahsil And District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh.

5. Minor Deepti D/o Late Shankar Devdas, Aged About 8 Years Minor Through

Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Kalyani Bai, R/o Village Mudena, Tahsil And

District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh.

6. Board Of Revenue Chhattisgarh Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

7. The Additional Commissioner, Raipur Division, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

8. Sub - Divisional Officer (Revenue), Mahasamund, District Mahasamund

Chhattisgarh.

9. Tehsildar Mahasamund, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondents

For the Petitioner

: Shri Rakesh Pandey, Advocate.

For Respondents No.1 to 5

:

None.

For Respondents No.6 to 9/ State :

Shri Ajay Kumrani, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant

CAV ORDER

Heard.

1.

This petition has been brought under Article 227 of the Constitution of

India praying for relief of quashing the order of Board of Revenue,

2

Chhattisgarh, dated 7.7.2015 (Annexure-P/1) and restoration of the order

passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Revenue Mahasamund in Revenue

Case No.56A/46/2008-09 dated 9.10.2009.

2.

The facts of the case are that Punitram, father of petitioner – Smt.

Meena Bai and respondent No.1 – Smt. Kalyani Bai, was village Kotwar of

village Mudhena, Tehsil Mahasamund, who has expired in the year 2001.

On his death, the petitioner and the husband of respondent No.1 both

applied for appointment as village Kotwar, but the husband of respondent

No.1 – Shankar Devdas has got appointment in the year 2001. Shankar

Devdas died in the year 2004, subsequent to which, his wife respondent

No.1 – Smt. Kalyani Bai was appointed as temporary village Kotwar vide

order dated 5.2.2004. Subsequent to which, the application of the petitioner

was considered and decided in her favour on 20.11.2006 (Annexure-P/2)

whereby, she was appointed as village Kotwar by the Tehsildar

Mahasamund.

3.

The service land that was given to Shankar Devdas has been given to

respondent No.1 by the same order dated 20.11.2006. The order dated

20.11.2006 was challenged by respondent No.1 before the Sub-Divisional

Officer, Revenue Mahasamund, which was dismissed by the order dated

12.3.2007. The application moved by the petitioner for grant of service land

in her favour before Tehsildar had been dismissed by the order dated

13.7.2009 (Annexure-P/3). This order was then challenged by the petitioner

before the Court of Sub-Divisional Officer, Revenue Mahasamund, who vide

order dated 9.10.2009 (Annexure-P/4), allowed the appeal and directed the

3

allotment of service land in favour of the petitioner. The private respondents

preferred an appeal before the Additional Commissioner, Raipur Division,

who vide order dated 5.7.2012 (Annexure-P/5) allowed the appeal and set

aside the order passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Revenue Mahasamund

upholding the order of Tehsildar dated 13.7.2009. The petitioner has then

preferred a revision before the Chhattisgarh Board of Revenue and the same

has been dismissed by the impugned order date