1 2025:CGHC:36461 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3883 of 2025 1 - Asha Polai W/o Shri Praful Polai Aged About 41 Years R/o Ward No. 31, Godripara, Township Khandwa, District Korea, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Premkunwar W/o Late Shri Mahadev R/o Village Odagi, Township Baikunthpur, District Korea, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Nirmala D/o Late Shri Mahadev R/o Village Odagi, Township Baikunthpur, District Korea, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Chandravati D/o Late Shri Mahadev R/o Village Odagi, Township Baikunthpur, District Korea, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Rukmani D/o Late Shri Mahadev R/o Village Odagi, Township Baikunthpur, District Korea, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Parvati D/o Late Shri Mahadev R/o Village Odagi, Township Baikunthpur, District Korea, Chhattisgarh. 6 - Ramgopal S/o Late Shri Mahadev R/o Village Odagi, Township Baikunthpur, District Korea, Chhattisgarh. 7 - Vijay S/o Late Shri Mahadev R/o Village Odagi, Township Baikunthpur, District Korea, Chhattisgarh. 8 - Ravtiraman D/o Shri Karansai Alias Karman R/o Halmukam Kharsura, Kataipara, Township Surajpur, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh. 9 - Sanjay Agrawal S/o Shri Mahangilal Agrawal R/o Baikunthpur, District Korea, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) 2 For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Yashkarn Singh, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 28/07/2025 1. By way of the present petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs: “10.1 This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire record concerning the case of the petitioner from the respondent authorities for its kind perusal and consideration. 10.2 This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ setting aside the order dated 08.05.2025 (Annexure P/1) passed by the board of revenue Bilaspur. 10.3 Any other relief, which this Hon’ble Court, may deem fit and proper, in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 08.05.2025 passed by the board of revenue, whereby the board of revenue has affirmed with the ex-parte order passed by the SDO in the year 2017. The order passed by the SDO was an order against the present petitioner who is the registered owner of the subject land and the name of the petitioner was also duly mutated in the 3 revenue records the SDO had not done its due enquiry before passing the said order, and the respondent did not implead the present petitioner as a party necessary in the appeal pending adjudication before the SDO. The Board of Revenue has affirmed with the ex-parte order passed by the SDO and set aside the order passed by the Commissioner in favor of the petitioner based on a disputed will, and deeming it not necessary for the present petitioner to be impleaded as a party, despite being the rightful owner to be a necessary party before the SDO. 3. Learned State counsel submits that there is an alternate remedy available to the petitioner. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner at length and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 5. Perusal of record shows that there is a dispute by and between the private parties with regard to the will and title and rights of the party will be decided by the Civil Court, therefore, there is no good ground to entertain this petition. 6. In view of the above, the present petition is dismissed with liberty to file appropriate application before appropriate forum. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE Madhurima