Daulat Ram vs Sitaram
2023 Latest Caselaw 95 Chatt

                                 -1-

                                                                 NAFR
         HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
             WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 5844 OF 2022
1.   Daulat Ram, S/o Shri Kapileshwar Kolta, aged about 84 years,
R/o Village Basanpali, Tahsil Pusour, District Raigarh, Civil and
Revenue District Raigarh (C.G.)
2.   Chandramani, S/o Shri Kapileshwar Kolta, aged about 84 years,
R/o Village Basanpali, Tahsil Pusour, District Raigarh, Civil and
Revenue District Raigarh (C.G.)
                                                       ... Petitioners
                               versus
1.     Sitaram, S/o Shri Bansidhar, R/o Village Gotama, Tahsil Pusaur,
District Raigarh (C.G.)
2.     Jaijeram, S/o Shri Bansidhar, R/o Village Gotama, Tahsil
Pusaur, District Raigarh (C.G.)
3.     Smt. Rukani, W/o Lekaru, R/o Village Kesapali, Tahsil Pusaur,
District Raigarh (C.G.)
4.     State of Chhattisgarh, through: Collector, Raigarh, District
Raigarh (C.G.)
5.     The Additional Commissioner, Bilaspur Division (Camp
Raigarh), District Raigarh (C.G.)
6.     The Tahsildar, Pusour, District Raigarh (C.G.)
                                                      ... Respondents

For Petitioners : Mr. Manoj Kumar Sinha, Advocate. For Respondent-State : Mr. Pragyaditya Acharya, P.L. _______________________________________________________ Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board [05/01/2023]

1. The present Writ Petition has been filed by the Petitioners

assailing the Order dated 28.11.2022 (Annexure P-1) passed by the

Respondent No.6 - the Tahsildar, Pusour, District Raigarh.

2. Perusal of record would show that the said Order passed by the

Tahsildar was on the basis of the Order dated 20.10.2022 passed by

the Respondent No.5 - the Additional Commissioner, Bilaspur

Division, Camp Raigarh.

3. Further, from perusal of the pleadings, it appears that the

Petitioners have already approached the Court of the Additional

Commissioner by preferring a review petition seeking review of the

Order dated 20.10.2022 and the said review petition is still pending

consideration along with the application for grant of stay.

4. In view of the fact that the review petition along with the interim

application is already pending consideration before the Court of the

Additional Commissioner, the present Writ Petition for the same

cause of action would not be maintainable.

5. Accordingly, reserving the right of the Petitioners to pursue the

matter before the Court of the Additional Commissioner in the said

review petition, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.

6. The Additional Commissioner is expected to take a decision on

the said review petition at the earliest, particularly taking note of the

Judgment and Decree that has been passed in favour of the

Petitioners in the Civil Suit.

7. The Writ Petition accordingly stands disposed of.

Sd/-

(P. Sam Koshy) JUDGE sharad