Chattisgarh High Court
Kotwar Association Of Chhattisgarh vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 1 July, 2025
Author: Rajani Dubey
Bench: Rajani Dubey
1
2025:CGHC:29270-DB
Digitally signed
by RAVVA UTTEJ
KUMAR RAJU
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
REVP No. 158 of 2025
Kotwar Association of Chhattisgarh, a Society Registered Under Society Registry Adhikaran
Niyam bearing Registration No. 40/2001, Registered Office at Karamchari Bhawan,
Bhudhapara, Civil and Revenue District Raipur, C.G. through its President Prem Kishore
Bagh S/o Late Shri Jai Singh Bagh age 55 years.
... Applicant
Versus
1 - State of Chhattisgarh through the Secretary, Revenue and Disaster Management
Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.).
2 - The Board of Revenue, Chhattisgarh Bilaspur (C.G.).
3 - The Chairman Board of Revenue, Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur, Circuit Court Raipur, (C.G.).
4 - The Commissioner Bilaspur Division, Bilaspur, (C.G.).
5 - The Additional Commissioner, Raipur Division, Raipur (C.G.).
6 - The Collector/ Additional Collector Baloda Bazar, District Raipur (C.G.).
7 - The Collector Raigarh District Raigarh (C.G.).
8 - The Collector Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.).
9 - The Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Baloda Bazar, District Raipur (C.G.).
2
10 - The Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.).
11 - The Sub-Divisional Officer, Saraipali District Mahasamund (C.G.).
12 - The Tahsildar/Naib Tahsildar, Tahsil Palari, District Raipur (C.G.).
13 - The Naib-Tehsildar, Saraipali, District Mahasamund (C.G.).
14 - The Tahsildar, Raigarh District Raigarh, (C.G.).
15 - The Tahsilldar-Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.).
16 - Gambhir Das Panika S/o Shri Sundar Das Panika, aged about 46 years, R/o Village
Harinbhattha, Tahsil Palari, District Raipur (C.G.).
17 - Rajesh Sarthi S/o Dilharan Sarthi, aged about 35 years, R/o Ward No. 14 Sarthi Colony,
Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.).
18 - Smt. Dhanmoti W/o Jaikishan, aged about 57 years, R/o Village Sanpanthi, P.H. No. 10,
Tehsil Saraipali, District Mahasamund (C.G.).
19 - Bhagwati W/o Shankh Ram aged about 42 years, R/o Village Barliya Tahsil and District
Raigarh (C.G.).
20 - Sukh Sagar Das S/o Ghasiya, aged about 40 years, Caste Panika, R/o Village
Harinbhattha, Tahsil Palari, District Raipur (C.G.)
... Respondents
For Applicant : Mr. Aniruddha Shrivastava, Advocate.
For State : Mr. Ashish Shukla, Additional A.G.
Hon'ble Smt Justice Rajani Dubey,J.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad, J.
Order on Board
Per Rajani Dubey, J.
01.07.2025
1. The review petition has been filed seeking review/recall of the
modification of the order dated 30.11.2018 passed in WPC No. 7048 of
2007 (Gambhir Das Panika v. Chairman, Board of Revenue) to the
extent is adversely affects the rights of Kotwars, and declare that the
land held by Kotwars and their ancestors prior to the 1950s does not
fall within the definition of "service land" under Section 183 of the
Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959, and that Kotwars are entitled
to be recognized as Bhumiswami under Section 158 of the said Code.
2. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State referring to the
averments made in the petition submits that when the dispute arose, it
was referred to the Division Bench of this Court and it has considered
each and every aspect of the matter and passed the order.
3. It is well settled that scope of review jurisdiction is extremely limited
and only an error apparent on face of record can be corrected in the
said jurisdiction and re-appraisal/re-appreciation cannot be done in
exercise of said jurisdiction as that would amount to exercise of
appellate jurisdiction which is impermissible in law as has been held in
catena of judgments by the Hon'ble Apex Court.
4. The applicant is seeking review/modification of the order passed in the
year 2018 in a batch of writ petitions. The applicant was not even a
party to the litigation. The Division Bench of this Court has decided the
question referred to it by the Single Bench with a detailed and well
reasoned order taking into account various decisions of the Hon'ble
Apex Court. Looking to the grounds raised by the applicant in this
review petition and having gone through the order sought to be
reviewed, this Court finds no such error apparent on the face of record
warranting review of the order dated 30.11.2018.
5. Accordingly, the instant review petition being without any substance is
hereby dismissed in limine..
Sd/- Sd/-
(Rajani Dubey) (Amitendra Kishore Prasad)
Judge Judge
U.K. Raju
