Chattisgarh High Court
Shyam Lal Puri vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 24 June, 2022
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPC No. 2704 of 2022
1. Shyam Lal Puri S/o Late Nayan Das Aged About 50 Years R/o Ward No. 21,
Rawad Kherwa, Manendragarh, District Koriya Chhattisgarh.
2. Makhan Lal Puri, S/o Late Nayan Das, Aged About 45 Years R/o Ward No. 20,
Ambikapur Road, Manendragarh, District Koriya Chhattisgarh.
3. Heera Lal Puri, S/o Late Nayan Das Aged About 42 Years R/o Ward No. 20,
Ambikapour Road, Manendragarh, District Koriya Chhattisgarh.
---- Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Revenue Department, Mahanadi
Bhawan, Mantralaya New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.
2. The Collector, District Koriya Chhattisgarh.
3. The Sub Divisonal Officer, Manendragarh, District Koriya Chhattisgarh.
4. The Tahsildar, Manendragarh, District Koriya Chhattisgarh.
5. The Patwari, Patwari Halka No. 27, Revenue Circle Manendragarh, District
Koriya Chhattisgarh.
6. Kulwant Singh , S/o Late Gurubachan Singh Aged About 74 Years R/o Near
Gurudwara, Manendragarh, District Koriya Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondents
For Petitioner : Mr. Malay Jain, Advocate
For State : Mr. Aman Kesharwani, PL
Hon'ble Mr. Justice P. Sam Koshy
Order on Board
24/06/2022
1. The present writ petition has been filed aggrieved of the inaction on the part of
the respondents in not mutating the property belonging to the petitioner situated
at Khasra No.210/1 at PH No.13 situated in Manendragarh District Korea
measuring 0.025 Hectares.
2. According to the petitioner, there is already a judgment and decree in favour of
the petitioner so far as title and possession is concerned vide judgment passed
in Civil Suit No.123 of 2014 passed by the Civil Judge Class-II, Manendragarh,
District Koriya on 14.09.2016. It is further contention of the petitioner that the
said judgment has further been affirmed by the First Appellate Court in the Civil
Appeal No.21-A of 2016 decided on 28.11.2017. Thus, the order has attained
finality as of now. It is further contention of the petitioner that pursuant to the
judgment of the First Appellate Court affirming the judgment and decree passed
by the Civil Court the petitioner has moved an application before Tahsildar for
mutation of the property in his name. The Tahsildar respondent no.4 has
subsequently allowed the application for mutation vide order dated 08.10.2018
which has further been affirmed by the Sub Divisional Officer(Revenue) on
25.01.2019. Subsequently the Tahsildar has been repeatedly writing to the
Patwari of PH No.27 for necessary compliance of the orders particularly so far
as mutation of the property in the name of the petitioner is concerned. However,
no further development has transpired which has led to the filing of the present
writ petition.
3. Given the aforesaid factual matrix as narrated by the counsel for the petitioner
in the writ petition as also submitted, this Court is of the opinion that there is no
reason why the respondent no.5 should not act upon the order passed by the
respondent no.3 & 4 in spite of repeated directions. It is not reflected as to
whether the judgment and decree passed by the Civil Court and which has also
been affirmed by the First Appellate Court has been further challenged or
whether there is any stay of the effect and operation of that order from any
superior Court thereafter.
4. Given the said facts, respondent no.5 is directed to ensure that order of the
Tahsildar dated 08.10.2018 and order of the Sub Divisional Officer affirming the
same dated 25.01.2019 which was ordered to be complied by the Patwari by
repeated reminders be acted upon in accordance with law at the earliest
preferably within 60 days. Non compliance of this order would be treated as
defiance of the order of this Court.
5. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed off.
Sd/-
(P. Sam Koshy)
Judge
Rohit
