Chattisgarh High Court
Hemprakash Sahu vs Venkatraman Raju on 25 August, 2025
1
2025:CGHC:42845
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
WPC No. 4481 of 2025
Hemprakash Sahu S/o Rohit Sahu Aged About 47 Years R/o Street No.
7, Model Town, Bhilai, Tehsil And District Durg (C.G.)
... Petitioner(s)
versus
1 - Venkatraman Raju S/o C.H. Chandaiyya R/o E-1870 C.G. Housing
Board Colony Kohka, Bhilai Nagar, Tehsil And District Durg (C.G.)
2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through President Board Of Revenue,
Bilaspur Link Raipur (C.G.)
---- Respondents
For Petitioner : Mr. Jitendra Gupta, Advocate
For State : Ms. Nupur Trivedi, PL
Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma
Order on Board
25/08/2025
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that he wants to with the
instant writ petition with liberty to file duly constituted petition under
Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
2. Learned State counsel has no objection on the aforesaid submission
made by learned counsel for the petitioner.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties.
4. Considering the judgment passed by this Court in Writ Appeal No.560
of 2022 (Girdhari vs. Bhondu @ Barati & Ors.). Para - 21 of the
said judgment is held as under :
"21. Returning to the facts of the present case in
light of the aforesaid legal position, it is quite
vivid that the Board of Revenue allowed the
revision petition preferred by the appellant
herein in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction
under Section 50 of the Code against which the
respondent No. 1 filed a writ petition before this
Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of
India. As discussed herein-above, it is quite vivid
that the Board of Revenue has been conferred
with the status of Court by virtue of Section 31 of
the Code and furthermore, the Board of Revenue
has also been conferred with the inherent
jurisdiction under Section 32 of the Code which
is akin to Section 151 of the Civil Procedure
Code which is a power conferred upon the Civil
Court. In that view of the matter, against the
order of Board of Revenue in exercise of its
revisional jurisdiction only and only a writ
petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of
India would be maintainable and the decision
relied upon by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the appellant in the matter of Dr. Ram
Sharan Lal Tripathi (supra) in which learned
Single Judge has held that Board of Revenue is
not a Civil Court, it is a revenue authority
established under the Code, cannot be held to be
laying down good and correct law in view of the
discussion made herein and in view of Sections
31 and 32 of the Code which confer status of a
Court upon the Board of Revenue. In that view of
the matter, the writ petition preferred by the
respondents No. 1 to 4 against the revisional
order of Board of Revenue was under Article 227
of the Constitution of India, therefore, by virtue
of proviso to Section 2(1) of the Act of 2006, writ
appeal is expressly barred."
5. Considering the submission made by learned counsel for the parties
and the judgment passed in Girdhari (supra), the instant petition is
dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty.
6. Registry is directed to return the certified copy of the impugned order
to the counsel for the petitioner after retaining the photocopy of the
same.
Sd/-
(Arvind Kumar Verma)
Judge
Vasant
