1 2025:CGHC:44848 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 4676 of 2025 1 - Dolamani S/o Late Motiram Aged About 62 Years Caste - Kolta, R/o Village - Radhapur, Police Station And Tahsil - Sitapur, District - Surguja Chhattisgarh 2 - Ekadashi S/o Late Motiram Aged About 57 Years Caste - Kolta, R/o Village - Radhapur, Police Station And Tahsil - Sitapur, District - Surguja Chhattisgarh 3 - Pancham S/o Late Motiram Aged About 50 Years Caste - Kolta, R/o Village - Radhapur, Police Station And Tahsil - Sitapur, District - Surguja Chhattisgarh 4 - Keval Pradhan S/o Late Motiram Aged About 49 Years Caste - Kolta, R/o Village - Radhapur, Police Station And Tahsil - Sitapur, District - Surguja Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Collector, Ambikapur, District - Surguja Chhattisgarh 2 - The Sub-Divisional Magistrate Sitapur, District - Surguja Chhattisgarh 3 - The Tahsildar Sitapur, District - Surguja Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioners : Mr. Ajeet Kumar Yadav, Advocate For State : Ms. Nupur Trivedi, PL VASANT KUMAR Digitally signed by VASANT KUMAR Date: 2025.09.03 17:21:20 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 03/09/2025 1. By way of this petition, petitioner sought following relief(s) : “10.1 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent no. 3 to provide the certified copy of the order dated 24.03.2011 passed by respondent No.3 in Revenue Case No.11/A-27/2010- 11 to the petitioner forthwith. 10.2 That, any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including award of the cost of the petition may be given.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that late Motiram (father of petitioners) had filed Civil Suit No. 39-A/1998 "Motiram & others Vs. Mathura & others" before the learned First Civil Judge Class-2, Ambikapur, District-Surguja (C.G.) for declaration of title and permanent injunction in respect of ancestral property. The said civil suit was dismissed by the judgment and decree dated 20.11.1998 and further held that the plaintiffs and defendants as per written statement, would be entitled to get 1/2nd share over the lands mentioned in Schedule "Chh" of the plaint. It is submitted that while passing the above judgment and decree, the learned trial Court has nowhere held that the defendants of the aforesaid civil suit would be entitled to get partition of the land mentioned in Schedule "Chh" of the plaint. In spite of no order for partition, the 3 defendants of aforesaid civil suit filed an application before the Tahsildar for partition of subject land and on the basis of said application, the Tahsildar (respondent no. 3) registered the Revenue Case no. 11/A-27/2010-11 and without serving any notice upon the petitioners, without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, the Tahsildar has passed the order dated 24.03.2011 for Fard Partition of subject land. The petitioners were not aware about the aforesaid order dated 24.03.2011 and after knowledge of same, the petitioners moved an application before the respondent no. 3 on 11.08.2017 for providing the certified copy of order dated 24.03.2011, but the said application has been returned to the petitioners with a note that no such case has been registered. Thereafter the petitioner filed appeal before the Collector as well as before the Commissioner, but the same was dismissed. Thereafter the petitioners have filed Civil Suit bearing Civil Suit No. 271/2023 before the learned Fifth Civil Judge Class-1, Ambikapur, District- Surguja for declaration of title, permanent injunction and further prayed that the order dated 24.03.2011 passed by the respondent no. 1 in Revenue Case No. 11/A-27/2010-11 be declared null and void. It is submitted that on the basis of said order dated 24.03.2011 the revenue records have been maintained and the petitioners have challenged the said order dated 24.03.2011 in civil suit, therefore the petitioners are required to produce the said order before the Civil Court to prove their case, but as the same has not been 4 provided to the petitioners, therefore the said civil suit is still pending. Hence this petition. 3. Learned State counsel contended that the concerned authority is ready to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner as per law. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents with utmost circumspection. 5. Considering the facts of the case and submission made by counsel for the respective parties, this writ petition is disposed of with direction to respondent No.1 – Collector Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) to consider and decide the representation/application filed by the petitioner on 16.02.2015 expeditiously preferably within an outer limit of ‘60 days’ from the date of receipt of copy of this order, in accordance with rules, regulations and law. If already not decided. 6. With the aforesaid direction, this petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Vasant