Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 24120 (CHH)

Died Nanki Ram Banjare v. State Of Chhattisgarh

WPS/6416/2016 · 2025-02-12

Shri Sanjay K Agrawal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:7564 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6416 of 2016 1 - Died Nanki Ram Banjare Through Legal Representative 1.1 - Uma Shankar Banjare, S/o. Nanki Ram @ Santosh Kumar Banjare, Aged About 43 Years, R/o. Village Kaitha, Tahsil Jaijaipur, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh 1.2 - Ku. Chandrika Bai Banjare, D/o. Nanki Ram @ Santosh Kumar Banjare, Aged About 38 Years, R/o. Village Kaitha, Tahsil Jaijaipur, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh 1.3 - Mahendra Kumar Banjare, S/o. Nanki Ram @ Santosh Kumar Banjare, Aged About 36 Years, R/o. Village Kaitha, Tahsil Jaijaipur, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh 1.4 - Smt. Pratibha, W/o. Lokeshwar Pd Banjare, Aged About 45 Years, R/o. Village Kaitha, Tahsil Jaijaipur, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh ... Petitioners versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Revenue Department Mahanadi Bhavan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ASHOK SAHU Digitally signed by ASHOK SAHU Date: 2025.02.13 16:27:11 +0530 2 2 - Arun Kumar, S/o. Sitaram Satnami, R/o. Village Kaitha, Tahsil- Jaijaipur, District- Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh 3 - Hathiram Satnami, S/o. Jugutram Satnami, R/o. Village Kaitha, Tahsil- Jaijaipur, District- Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Jailal Satnami, S/o. Cherkuram Satnami, R/o. Village Kaitha, Tahsil- Jaijaipur, District- Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh 5 - Ramlal Satnami, S/o. Sitaram Satnami, R/o. Village Kaitha, Tahsil- Jaijaipur, District- Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents (Cause Title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioners : Mr. Parth Shrivastava, Advocate appears on behalf of Mr. Anand Shukla, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Rahul Tamaskar, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 12.02.2025 1. Nanki Ram was the Kotwar of Village Kaitha, Tahsil Hasaud, District Janjgir-Chamapa and by order dated 23.02.2013, in a duly constituted revenue proceeding, the Additional Tahsildar removed the services of the petitioner holding that he has completed the age of 62 years 11 months and 15 days, which was challenged and ultimately in the second round of litigation, the Additional 3 Commissioner by its order dated 24.02.2016 held that removal of the petitioner is in accordance with law and also set aside the order dated 23.02.2013 appointing the temporary Kotwar and also directed the Tahsildar to initiate fresh proceeding under Section 230 of the C.G. Land Revenue Code read with the concerned Rules for appointment of Kotwar, which has sought to be challenged and in the meanwhile the sole petitioner has died. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that removal order has been set aside by the order of the Commissioner and the petitioners/ LRs of the original Kotwar will get the priority in making the appointment. 3. Learned State counsel submits that the Commissioner has rightly directed for initiation of fresh proceeding for appointment of new Kotwar. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection. 5. Since the Tahsildar has directed to remove the Kotwar on the ground that he has completed the age of 62 years, 11 months and 15 days and by virtue of Rule 6 of the Kotwari Rules, the appointing authority may terminate the services 4 of a Kotwar whenever, owing to age or to mental or physical infirmity, he is no longer fit to perform his duties of the Kotwar. As such, considering the Rule on account of age finding him unsuitable to the post, the Tahsildar has directed to remove the services of the petitioner, which has been affirmed by the Commissioner and in the meanwhile, unfortunately, the petitioner has died also during pendency of this writ petition. Therefore, I do not find any merit to entertain this writ petition and accordingly, it is dismissed. However, the LRs of the petitioners are at liberty to participate in the process for appointment of Kotwar in accordance with rules. 6. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands finally disposed of. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Ashok