Shri Sanjay Deshkar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2025 Latest Caselaw 468 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Shri Sanjay Deshkar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 7 May, 2025

Author: Vishal Dhagat

Bench: Vishal Dhagat

          NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:21490




                                                                1                           WP-15595-2024
                              IN      THE     HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                    AT JABALPUR
                                                         BEFORE
                                           HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL DHAGAT
                                                     ON THE 7 th OF MAY, 2025
                                                WRIT PETITION No. 15595 of 2024
                                                SHRI SANJAY DESHKAR
                                                        Versus
                                      THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
                           Appearance:
                                   Shri Jaideep Sirpurkar - Advocate for petitioner.
                                   Shri Lalit Joglekar - Government Advocate for respondents No. 1 to
                           3/State.
                                   Shri Kaustubh Singh - Advocate for respondent No.4.

                                                                    ORDER

Petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging order dated 06.05.2024 passed by respondent No. 2- Collector Chhindwara in Revision No. 0023/2023-24.

2. Counsel appearing for petitioner submitted that respondent No.4 was having a right to prefer appeal therefore, revision was not maintainable

and order is without jurisdiction.

3. Counsel appearing for respondent No.4 relied upon an order passed by coordinate bench reported in 2016 (1) MPLJ 320 , Ramgopal Sharma v. Kamla Bai. Reliance is placed on para 11 and 14, which are quoted as under:

"11. Section 50 of the Code deals with revision. The revisional authority for the purpose of satisfying itself as to legality or propriety of any order passed by or as to the regularity of the proceedings of any Revenue Officer subordinate to it call for, and examine the record of

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:21490

2 WP-15595-2024 any case pending before, or disposed of by such officer. He is equipped with the power to pass such order in reference thereto as he thinks fit. Justice Gulab Gupta in 1985 RN 181, Ghurwa Ram v. State of M.P. opined that there is distinction between appellate powers and revisional powers. It is held that appeal is considered to be a continuation of the proceedings and the entire proceedings are before the appellate authority which has the power of reviewing evidence. There is no such power with the revisional authority. Indeed the revisional powers vested in an authority are similar to the power of issuing certiorari vested in the High Court and is limited to keeping the subordinate Court within the bounds of their jurisdiction. It is apposite to mention here that in Ghurwa Ram (supra) this Court opined that the propriety that has to be considered is the propriety of the order challenged in revision and not of the original order.

14. In the present case, as noticed, the petitioner's appeal is decided by a short and cryptic order dated 24-3-2000. The appellate authority did not deal with the merits of the matter and opined that Court below without minutely examining the registered Will disbelieved it which is incorrect. The SDO while passing Annexure P/3 did not deal with the points raised in the appeal nor gave any finding on the merits of the matter. In revisional jurisdiction, the revisional authorities have upheld the order of Tehsildar whereas the legality, validity and propriety of appellate order (Annexure P/3) alone was called in question. In Ghurwa Ram (supra) this Court in no uncertain terms made it clear that appellate powers and revisional powers are distinct and different. The revisional powers are almost analogous to the power of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution. Re-appreciation of evidence and examining the evidence as an appellate authority is not permissible. While exercising revisional jurisdiction, mainly decision making process needs to be examined. In appeal, the entire matter on merits can be re-examined, evidence can be re-appreciated and normally appellate authority can undertake the same exercise which is permissible for a Court of first instance/original jurisdiction."

In view of same, it is submitted by him that revision is maintainable.

4. Heard the counsel for the parties.

5. As per Section 50(2)(a) of M.P. Land Revenue Code, no application for revision shall lie against an order which is appealable. Counsel for petitioner has relied upon a judgment which has been passed when M.P. Land Revenue Code was not amended. Therefore, same is not applicable in

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:21490

3 WP-15595-2024 the case.

6. Considering the same, order dated 06.05.2024 passed by Collector in Revision No. 23/2023-24 is set aside. Respondent No. 4 is at liberty to file appeal in accordance with law.

7. It is made clear that no opinion is expressed on merits of the case.

8. With aforesaid, writ petition is disposed off.

(VISHAL DHAGAT) JUDGE

vkt