1 / 4 2025:CGHC:16844 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR REVP No. 79 of 2025 1 - Kalavati Patel D/o Daulatram Patel Aged About 51 Years R/o Village Sangitarai, Tehsil And District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) 2 - Mathura Bai Patel W/o Daulatram Patel Aged About 76 Years R/o Village Sangitarai, Tehsil And District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) 3 - Gandharva Sen Patel S/o Daulatram Patel Aged About 60 Years R/o Village Sangitarai, Tehsil And District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) 4 - Hemant Kumar Patel S/o Late Daulatram Patel Aged About 57 Years R/o Village Sangitarai, Tehsil And District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Gaurishankar Patel S/o Late Shivlal Patel Aged About 65 Years R/o Mukhya Basti, Village Bahma Tehsil Lailunga, District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) 2 - Umashankar Patel S/o Late Shivlal Patel Aged About 63 Years R/o Mukhya Basti, Village Bahma Tehsil Lailunga, District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) 3 - Jaishankar Patel S/o Late Shivlal Patel Aged About 60 Years R/o 2 / 4 Mukhya Basti, Village Bahma Tehsil Lailunga, District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) 4 - Durgacharan Patel S/o Chitrabhaan Patel R/o Village Bahma Tehsil Lailunga, District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) 5 - Mahesh Kumar Patel S/o Chitrabhaan Patel R/o Village Bahma Tehsil Lailunga, District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) 6 - Sushil Kumar Patel S/o Chitrabhaan Patel R/o Village Bahma Tehsil Lailunga, District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) 7 - The Collector Raigarh District Raigarh Chhattisgarh 8 - The Sub- Divisional Officer (Revenue) Raigarh, Tehsil District Raigarh Chhattisgarh 9 - The Tehsildar Raigarh, Tehsil District Raigarh Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Rajkumar Pali, Advocate For Respondents/ State : Mr. Rishabh Bisen, Panel Lawyer (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE BIBHU DATTA GURU) Order on Board 11/04/2025 1. The review petitioners (Respondents No.4 to 7 in WPC No.232/2025) seek review of the order dated 15/01/2025 passed in WPC No.232/2025 on the ground that the said petition has been disposed of at the motion stage without affording opportunity of hearing. 2. From bare perusal of the order passed in the Writ Petition, which is sought to be reviewed herein, it is apparent that this Court had 3 / 4 directed the revenue authorities to decide the objection/ application moved by the writ petitioners in accordance with law. 3. There is no other ground pointed out by the Review Petitioners showing any manifest error on the record. It is well settled principles of law that the review proceedings are not by way of an appeal and have to be strictly confined to the scope and ambit of Order 47 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Even in exercise of review jurisdiction by the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution, the review petitioners have not produced any ground for review. 4. It appears that the Review Petitioners by presenting of this review petition seeks an opportunity to argue the entire case afresh on merits under the garb of the review petition, which is not permissible and tenable in law. 5. It is well settled principle of law that under the garb of review petition, the Review Petitioners should not be permitted to argue the entire case afresh, which would amount to convert the review petition into an appeal and the same is not sustainable in law. {See: Meera Bhanjan v. Smt. Nirmal Kumar Chowdhary, AIR 1995 SC 455, Lily Thomas etc. v. Union of India and others, AIR 2000 SC 1650, Ajit Kumar Rath v. State of Orissa and others, AIR 2000 SC 85, Government of T.N. & Others v. M. Ananchu Asari and others, (2005) 2 SCC 332, and Kerla State Electricity Board v. Hitech Electrothermicsm & Hydropower Ltd. and others, (2005) 6 SCC 651}. 4 / 4 6. Accordingly, the Review Petition is rejected. However, in the interest of justice, it is made clear that before taking any decision on the objection/ application of the Writ Petitioners, pursuant to the order of this Court dated 15/01/2025, the respondent revenue authorities, are directed to afford due opportunity of hearing to all the parties concerned and thereafter passed a reasoned and speaking orders in accordance with law and on its own merits. The Review Petitioners are also at liberty to submit relevant documents relating to the subject issue before the aforesaid authorities. The entire exercise be completed within a period of 30 days from the date of this order. 7. Copy of this order be supplied to the parties alongwith the copy of the order dated 15/01/2025 passed in WPC No.232/2025. Sd/- (BIBHU DATTA GURU) JUDGE $. Bhilwar