1 2025:CGHC:33190 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3636 of 2025 1 - Munni Bai D/o Aadar Sai, Aged About 27 Years R/o Village Kansabel, Tahsil Kansabel, District Jashpur (Chhattisgarh) 2 - Tosh Narayan S/o Aadar Sai, Aged About 24 Years R/o Village Kansabel, Tahsil Kansabel, District Jashpur (Chhattisgarh) ... Petitioners versus 1 - Manoj S/o Krishnanath @ Kushram, R/o Village Kansabel, Tahsil Kansabel, District Jashpur (Chhattisgarh) 2 - Budhan S/o Krishnanath @ Kushram, R/o Village Kansabel, Tahsil Kansabel, District Jashpur (Chhattisgarh) 3 - Sudhan S/o Krishnanath @ Kushram, R/o Village Kansabel, Tahsil Kansabel, District Jashpur (Chhattisgarh) 4 - Smt. Fulmati Wd/o Krishnanath @ Kushram, R/o Village Kansabel, Tahsil Kansabel, District Jashpur (Chhattisgarh) 5 - Board Of Revenue, Bilaspur Division, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) 6 - Commissioner, Sarguja Division, Ambikapur, District Sarguja (Chhattisgarh) 7 - Additional Collector, Jashpur, District Jashpur (Chhattisgarh) 8 - Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Bagicha, District Jashpur (Chhattisgarh) 9 - Tahsildar, Tahsil Kansabel, District Jashpur (Chhattisgarh) ... Respondents For Petitioners : Mr. Praveen Kumar Dhurandhar, Advocate For State/respondents : Mr. Anurag Tripathi, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 16.07.2025 1. By way of this petition, the petitioners are seeking for the following reliefs:- “a. This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to set-aside/quash the impugned order dated 19.12.2024 (Annexure P/1). b. Any appropriate writ, direction or order may also kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner, which this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the circumstances of the case.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the learned Board of 2 Revenue has passed the order dated 19.12.2024 without affording proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. The Board of Revenue has wrongly interpreted the provisions of order 47 Rule 4(1) (ii) of CPC and refused to grant sanction required under Section 51(1)(i) of the Code. 3. He submits that the impugned order dated 19.12.2024 is passed by the member of the Board of Revenue who has no jurisdiction to take decision over the reference of sanction for review under Section 51(1) (I) of the Code. 4. Learned counsel for respondents/State opposes the prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioners by stating that the petition is not maintainable. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it is clear that the matter pertains to the disputed by and between the parties i.e. the petitioners and the private respondents with regard to the title/partition and right of the parties over the disputed lands i.e. Khasra No. 5/1, 5/2, 13/2, 17, 38/3, 42, 46, 132/2, 135/1, 136/1, 138/1, 141, 142/1, 142/7, 143/1, 309/2, 308/2, 309 and 334/3 (total 16 khasra) admeasuring 6.046 hectare situated at village Kansabel, P.H.No. 4, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. Hence the petition is not maintainable. Therefore, the present petition deserves to be and is hereby dismissed as not maintainable. 7. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed as not maintainable. Certified copies as per rules. sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) alfiza JUDGE