Chattisgarh High Court
Anil Kumar Maurya vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 4 March, 2022
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
WA No. 107 of 2022
1. Anil Kumar Maurya S/o Late Chandrabali Maurya, Aged About 53
Years R/o Tikrapara, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.
2. Sunil Kumar Maurya S/o Late Chandrabali Maurya Aged About 43
Years R/o Tikrapara, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.)
---- Appellants
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Revenue Department,
Mantralaya, New Raipur Chhattisgarh.
2. Collector, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.
3. Tehsildar, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.
4. Smt. Jagriti Uikey W/o Shivkant Uikey R/o Tikrapara, Bilaspur
Chhattisgarh.
5. Station House Officer Police Station City Kotwali Bilaspur
Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondents
(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)
For Appellants : Mr. Sunil Kumar Soni, Advocate.
For Respondents No. 1 to 3 & 5 : Mr. R.M. Solapurkar, Govt. Advocate.
Hon'ble Shri Arup Kumar Goswami, Chief Justice
Hon'ble Shri Gautam Chourdiya, Judge
Judgment on Board
Per Arup Kumar Goswami, Chief Justice
04.03.2022
Heard Mr. Sunil Kumar Soni, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also
heard Mr. R.M. Solapurkar, learned Government Advocate, appearing for
respondents No. 1 to 3 & 5.
2. This appeal is presented against an order dated 02.02.2022 passed
by the learned Single Judge in WPC No. 604 of 2022.
3. The writ petition was filed assailing an order dated 11.01.2022
which came to be passed by the Tehsildar, Bilaspur on the application of
respondent No. 4 under Section 250 of the Land Revenue Code, 1959
(for short ' the Code').
4. A perusal of the order of the learned Single Judge would go to show
that submissions were advanced that the Tehsildar did not have
jurisdiction to adjudicate the dispute under Section 250 of the Code
because there were certain constructions made by the petitioners. It is
also seen that reliance was placed in the judgment of the Madhya
Pradesh High Court in the case of Krishnakumar Das and Another v.
Balramdas and Others, reported in 1968 SCC online MP 143 and
judgment of this Court in the case of Asgar Ali v. Amna bi, reported in
2011 SCC online CHH 12.
5. The learned Single Judge recorded that appeal lies under Section
44 of the Code and therefore, the petitioners are to avail alternate remedy
and accordingly, the writ petition was not entertained, reserving liberty to
the petitioners to assail the said order before the appropriate authority
under the Code.
6. Mr. Soni submits that the learned Single Judge did not advert to the
submission advanced that the Tehsildar lacked inherent jurisdiction to
entertain the dispute raised by the respondent No. 4 and that in case of
lack of jurisdiction, it is not necessary that the petitioners have to avail
alternative remedy. Mr. Soni has drawn the attention of the Court to
paragraph 4 of the application submitted by the respondent No. 4.
Placing reliance on the judgments of Krishnakumar Das (supra) and
Asgar Ali (supra), he has contended that it was held that jurisdiction of the
Tehsildar is ousted in case there are constructions on the land.
7. Mr. R.M. Solapurkar, learned Government Advocate, appearing for
respondents No. 1 to 3 & 5 supports the order of the learned Single
Judge.
8. A perusal of the judgments in the case of Krishnahumar Das
(supra) and Asgar Ali (supra), would go to show that the learned Single
Judge had observed that if the dominant purpose of a Bhumiswami is to
recover possession of his house from which he has been illegally
dispossessed, his house cannot come within the definition of word "Land"
as defined in the Code to give jurisdiction to a Tehsildar to restore him his
possession under Section 250 of the Code.
9. We are of the considered opinion that the present appeal does not
portray a picture that the respondent No.4 seeks to recover possession of
his house and therefore, the cases referred to by Mr. Soni have no
application to the present dispute.
10. In that view of the matter, we find no merit in this appeal and,
accordingly, the same is dismissed.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Arup Kumar Goswami) (Gautam Chourdiya)
Chief Justice Judge
Hem
