1 2026:CGHC:22052 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1287 of 2015 (cause-title taken from the CIS system) 1 - M/s Sunil Kumar And Sons (Huf) Through, Karta Sunil Agrawal, S/o Madanlal Agrawal, Aged About 40 Years, R/o House No. 186, Samta Colony, Tahsil, P.S. And Post Raipur, Civil And Revenue District Raipur Chhattisgarh --- Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through, Secretary, Revenue Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Capital Complex, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Board Of Revenue Through Its President, Board Of Revenue, Chhattisgarh Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 3 - The Additional Commissioner, Raipur Division, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 4 - Additional Collector Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 5 - Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 6 - Ajay Agrawal S/o Late Chhaganlal Agrawal, R/o Ramsagarpara, P.S. And Post Raipur, Civil And Revenue District Raipur Chhattisgarh 7 - Khelan Sonkar (Died) Through Lrs As Per Hon'ble Court Order Dated 02-12-2024 7.1 - Chandrika Sonkar S/o Late Khelan Sonkar Aged About 55 Years R/o Samta Colony, Near Radhakrishna Mandir, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 7.2 - Teerath Sonkar S/o Late Khelan Sonkar Aged About 50 Years R/o Ramkund, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 8 - Collector, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Manoj Paranjpe, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Kabir Kalwani, Advocate For Respondents No. 1 & 3 to 5 and 8 : Mr. Rahul Tamaskar, Government Advocate For Respondents No. 7.1. and 7.2. : Mr. Ravi Kumar Banjare, Advocate WPC No. 1234 of 2015 1 - Rajendra Rathore S/o Late Abir Chand Rathore Aged About 55 Years R/o 29, School, Road Choubey Colony, Swami Atmananad Ward, Thana Saraswati Nagar, Distt. Raipur Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh --- Petitioner versus 3 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh S/o Through Its Secretary, Department Of Revenue And Disaster Department, Mantralaya, Raipur Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh 2 - Board Of Revenue, Through Its President Bilaspur Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 3 - The Additional Commissioner, Raipur Division Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Additional Collector, Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 5 - Sub Divisional Officer, R Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 6 - Ajay Agrawal S/o Late Chaganlal Agrawal R/o Ramsagarpara, Tahsil And Distt. Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 7 - Shri Khelan Sonkar (Died And Deleted) Through Lrs. As Per Honble Court Order Dated 02-12-2024 7.1 - (A) Chandrika Sonkar S/o Late Khelan Sonkar, Aged About 61 Years R/o Samta Colony, Near Radhakrishna Mandir, Raipur, District-Raipur (C.G.) 7.2 - (B) Teerth Sonkar S/o Late Khelan Sonakar, Aged About 53 Years R/o Ramkund, Raipur, District-Raipur (C.G.) 7.3 - (C) Santosh Sonkar S/o Late Khelan Sonkar, Aged About 55 Years R/o Ramkund, Raipur, District-Raipur (C.G.) 7.4 - (D) Usha Sonkar D/o Late Khelan Sonkar, Aged About 45 Years R/o Ramkund, Raipur, District-Raipur (C.G.) 7.5 - (E) Lata Sonkar D/o Late Khelan Sonkar, Aged About 44 Years R/o Bhatagaon Raipur, District-Raipur (C.G.) 4 7.6 - (F) Radha Sonkar D/o Late Khelan Sonkar, Aged About 42 Years R/o Bhatagaon, Raipur, District-Raipur (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Parag Kotecha, Advocate For Respondents No. 1 to 5 : Mr. Rahul Tamaskar, Government Advocate For Respondents No. 7.1. to 7.6. : Mr. Ravi Kumar Banjare, Advocate WPC No. 2694 of 2016 1 - Sushil Kumar Agrawal S/o Mahadev Prasad Agrawal, Aged About 65 Years R/.O Bhaisthan Road, Opp. Annapurna Complex, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh ---Petitioner Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Mahanadi Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Post Office And Police Station Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh 2 - Board Of Revenue, Through Its President, Board Of Revenue, Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Additional Commissioner, Raipur Division, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 5 4 - Additional Collector, Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 5 - Sub Divisional Officer Revenue, Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 6 - Ajay Agrawal, S/o Late Shri Chhaganlal Agrawal, R/o Ramsagarpara, P S And Post Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 7 - Khelan Sonkar (Died) Through Lrs. As Per Honble Court Order Dated- 03-04-2025. 7.1 - Chandrika Sonkar S/o Late Khelan Sonkar Aged About 61 Years R/o Samta Colony, Near Radhakrishna Mandir, Raipur, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.) 7.2 - Teerath Sonkar S/o Late Khelan Sonkar Aged About 53 Years R/o Ramkund, Raipur, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.) 7.3 - Santosh Sonkar S/o Late Khelan Sonkar Aged About 55 Years R/o Ramkund, Raipur, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.) 7.4 - Usha Sonkar D/o Late Khelan Sonkar Aged About 45 Years R/o Ramkund, Raipur, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.) 7.5 - Lata Sonkar D/o Late Khelan Sonkar Aged About 44 Years R/o Bhatagaon, Raipur, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.) 7.6 - Radha Sonkar D/o Late Khelan Sonkar Aged About 42 Years R/o Bhatagaon, Raipur, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.) 8 - Collector, Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) 6 For Petitioner : Mr. Anuroop Panda, Advocate For Respondents No. 1 to 5 and 8 : Mr. Rahul Tamaskar, Government Advocate For Respondents No. 7.1. to 7.6. : Mr. Ravi Kumar Banjare, Advocate WPC No. 1237 of 2015 1 - Smt. Veena Khanna W/o Harish Kumar Khanna, Aged About 50 Years R/o House H 18, Rajeev Nagar, District Raipur Chhattsigarh , Chhattisgarh ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh S/o Through Its Secretary Departmnt Of Revenue And Disaster Department Mantralyaa, Raipur Chhattisgarh , Chhattisgarh 2 - Board Of Revenue Through Its President Bilaspur Chhattisgarh , District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 3 - The Additional Commissioner Raipur, Division Raipur Chhattisgarh , District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 - The Additional Collector Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 5 - Sub Divisional Officer Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 7 6 - Ajay Agrawal S/o Late Chaganlal Agrawal R/o Ramsagarpara Tahsil And District Raipur Chhattsigarh , District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 7 - Shri Khelan Sonker (Died And Deleted) Through Legal Heirs In Compliance Of Honble Court Order Dated 02-12-2024., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 7.1 - 7(A) Chandrika Sonkar S/o Late Khelan Sonkar, Aged About 61 Years R/o Samta Colony, Near Radhakrishna Mandir, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 7.2 - 7(B) Teerath Sonkar, S/o Late Khelan Sonkar, Aged About 53 Years R/o Ramkund, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 7.3 - 7(C) Santosh Sonkar S/o Late Khelan Sonkar Aged About 55 Years R/o Ramkund, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 7.4 - 7(D) Usha Sonkar D/o Late Khelan Sonkar Aged About 45 Years R/o Ramkund, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 7.5 - 7(E) Lata Sonkar D/o Late Khelan Sonkar Aged About 44 Years R/o Bhatagaon Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 7.6 - 7(F) Radha Sonkar D/o Late Khelan Sonkar Aged About 42 Years R/o Bhatagaon, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Parag Kotecha, Advocate For Respondents No. 1 to 5 : Mr. Rahul Tamaskar, Government Advocate For Respondents No. 7.1. to 7.6. : Mr. Ravi Kumar Banjare, Advocate 8 WPC No. 1238 of 2015 1 - Rakesh Jaiswani S/o Holaram Jaiswani Aged About 27 Years R/o Ramnagar, Kota Road, Raipur, At Present R/o Kashyap Colony, Gali No. 3, Thana Kotwali, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh , Chhattisgarh ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh S/o Thorugh Its Secretary Department Of Revenue And Disaster Department Mantralaya , Raipur Chhattisgarh , Chhattisgarh 2 - Board Of Revenue Through Its President Bilaspur Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 3 - The Additional Commissioner Raipur, Division Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 - The Additional Collector, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 5 - Sub Divisional Officer R Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 6 - Ajay Agrawal S/o Late Chaganlal Agrawal R/o Ramsagarpara, Tahsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh , District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 7 - Shri Khelan Sonker S/o Late Ramprasad Sonker R/o Ramkund Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) 9 For Petitioner : Mr. Parag Kotecha, Advocate For Respondents No. 1 to 5 : Mr. Rahul Tamaskar, Government Advocate For Respondents No. 7.1. to 7.6. : Mr. Ravi Kumar Banjare, Advocate WPC No. 1288 of 2015 1 - Vijay Kumar Agrawal S/o Satyanarayan Agrawal Aged About 64 Years R/o Gulmohar Park, Ramnagar, P.S. Sarswati Nagar, Post Ram Nagar, Raipur, Civil And Revenue District Raipur, Chhattisgarh., Chhattisgarh ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh S/o Through Secretary, Revenue Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Capital Complex, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh 2 - Board Of Revenue, Through Its President, Board Of Revenue, Chhattisgarh Bilaspur Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 3 - The Additional Commissioner, Raipur Division, District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Additional Collector, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 5 - Sub- Divisional Officer Revenue, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 10 6 - Ajay Agrawal S/o. Late Chhaganlal Agrawal R/o. Ramsagarpara, P.S. And Post Raipur, Civil And Revenue District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 7 - Khelan Sonkar (Died And Deleted) Throug Legal Heirs In Compliance Of Honble Court Order Dated 02-12-2024., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 7.1 - 7(A) Chandrika Sonkar S/o Late Khelan Sonkar Aged About 61 Years R/o Samta Colony, Near Radhakrishna Mandir, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 7.2 - 7(B) Teerath Sonkar S/o Late Khelan Sonkar Aged About 53 Years R/o Ramkund, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 7.3 - 7(C) Santosh Sonkar S/o Late Khelan Sonkar Aged About 55 Years R/o Ramkund, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 7.4 - 7(D) Usha Sonkar D/o Late Khelan Sonkar Aged About 45 Years R/o Ramkund, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 7.5 - 7(E) Lata Sonkar D/o Late Khelan Sonkar Aged About 44 Years R/o Bhatagaon Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 7.6 - 7(F) Radha Sonkar D/o Late Khelan Sonkar Aged About 42 Years R/o Bhatagaon, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 8 - Collector, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Manoj Paranjpe, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Kabir Kalwani, Adovcate For Respondents No. 1 to 5 and 8 : Mr. Rahul Tamaskar, Government Advocate For Respondents No. 7.1. to 7.6. : Mr. Ravi Kumar Banjare, Advocate 11 WPC No. 1240 of 2015 1 - Shri Jalaram Marketing Ram Nagar, Kota Road, Near Disha College, Raipur Through Its Partner Pradeep Kumar Manek, Aged About 45 Years, S/o P.R. Manek, R/o Mahamaya Apartment, Flat No. 301, Near Mahamaya Mandir, Thana Purani Basti District Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh S/o Through Its Secretary, Department Of Revenue And Disaster Department, Mantralaya, Raipur Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh 2 - Board Of Revenue, Through Its President, Bilaspur, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 3 - The Additional Commissioner, Raipur Division, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Additional Collector, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 5 - Sub Divisional Officer, R Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 6 - Ajay Agrawal, S/o Late Chaganlal Agrawal, R/o Ramsagarpara, Tahsil And District Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 7 - Shri Khelan Sonker (Died) Through Lrs. As Per Honble Court Order Dated 02-12-2024. 7.1 - (A) Chandrika Sonkar S/o Late Khelan Sonkar Aged About 61 Years R/o Samta Colony, Near Radhakrishna Mandir, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 7.2 - (B) Teerath Sonkar S/o Late Khelan Sonkar Aged About 53 Years R/o Ramkund, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 12 7.3 - (C) Santosh Sonkar S/o Late Khelan Sonkar Aged About 55 Years R/o Ramkund, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 7.4 - (D) Usha Sonkar D/o Late Khelan Sonkar Aged About 45 Years R/o Ramkund, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 7.5 - (E) Lata Sonkar D/o Late Khelan Sonkar Aged About 44 Years R/o Bhatagaon Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 7.6 - (F) Radha Sonkar D/o Late Khelan Sonkar Aged About 42 Years R/o Bhatagaon, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Parag Kotecha, Advocate For Respondents No. 1 to 5 : Mr. Rahul Tamaskar, Government Advocate For Respondents No. 7.1. to 7.6. : Mr. Ravi Kumar Banjare, Advocate WPC No. 1930 of 2015 1 - Bajrang Lal Lakhotiya And Ors. S/o Surajmal Lakhotiya, Aged About 67 Years R/o Daliyawada, Rajpura, District Burhanpur Madhya Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh 2 - Pradeep Kumar Lakhotiya S/o Hariprasad Lakhotiya, Aged About 32 Years R/o A 301, Dattatriya Apartment, Near Bus Stand, District Burhanpur, At Present R/o 222, Samta Colony, Near Pandeya Nursingh Home, Tahsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 13 3 - Pankaj Kumar Lakhotiya S/o Tarachand Lakhotiya, Aged About 27 Years R/o 178/15, Green Park Colony, Maheshwari Bhawan Road, Burhanpur, District Burhanpur Madhya Pradesh......Through Its Power Of Attorney Holder Of Petitioner No. 1 And 3 Pradeep Kumar Lakhotiya Aged About 32 Years, S/o Hariprasad Lakhotiya, R/o A 301, Dattatriya Apartment, Near Bus Stand, District Burhanpur, At Present R/o 222, Samta Colony, Near Pandeya Nursingh Home, Tahsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh , District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh S/o Through Its Secretary, Department Of Revenue And Disaster Department, Mantralaya, Raipur , Chhattisgarh 2 - Board Of Revenue Through Its President Bilaspur Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 3 - The Additional Commissioner, Raipur Division Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Additional Collector Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 5 - Sub Divisional Officer, R Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 6 - Ajay Agrawal S/o Late Chaganlal Agrawal, R/o Ramsagarpara, Tahsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 7 - Shri Khelan Sonker (Died) Through Lrs As Per Honble Court Order Dated 02-12-2024. 14 7.1 - A) Chandrika Sonkar S/o Late Khelan Sonkar Aged About 61 Years R/o Samta Colony, Near Radhakrishna Mandir, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 7.2 - B) Teerath Sonkar S/o Late Khelan Sonkar Aged About 53 Years R/o Ramkund, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 7.3 - C) Santosh Sonkar S/o Late Khelan Sonkar Aged About 55 Years R/o Ramkund, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 7.4 - D) Usha Sonkar D/o Late Khelan Sonkar Aged About 45 Years R/o Ramkund, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 7.5 - E) Lata Sonkar D/o Late Khelan Sonkar Aged About 44 Years R/o Bhatagaon Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 7.6 - F) Radha Sonkar D/o Late Khelan Sonkar Aged About 42 Years R/o Bhatagaon Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Parag Kotecha, Advocate For Respondents No. 1 to 5 : Mr. Rahul Tamaskar, Government Advocate For Respondents No. 7.1. to 7.6. : Mr. Ravi Kumar Banjare, Advocate WPC No. 1282 of 2015 1 - Vikas Vig S/o Shri Brijlal Vig Aged About 34 Years Resident Of Kelkarpara, Station Road, Raipur, Tahsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh Civil And Revenue District Raipur. Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh ---Petitioner(s) 15 Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh S/o Through The Ministry Of Revenue, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur. Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh 2 - Commissioner, Raipur Division, Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Collector, District Raipur . Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Tahsildar, Raipur. Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 5 - Ajay Agrawal S/o Late Chhagan Lal Agrawal Resident Of Ramsagarpara, Tahsil And District Raipur. Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 6 - Khelan Sonkar (Dead) Through Lrs. As Per Honble Court Order Dated 02-12-2024. 6.1 - A. Chandrika Sonkar S/o Late Khelan Sonkar Aged About 61 Years R/o Samta Colony, Near Radhakrishna Mandir, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 6.2 - B. Teerath Sonkar S/o Late Khelan Sonkar Aged About 53 Years R/o Ramkund, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 6.3 - C. Santosh Sonkar S/o Late Khelan Sonkar Aged About 55 Years R/o Ramkund, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 6.4 - D. Usha Sonkar D/o Late Khelan Sonkar Aged About 45 Years R/o Ramkund, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. For Petitioner : Mr. Adil Minhaj, Advocate For Respondents No. 1 to 4 : Mr. Rahul Tamaskar, Government Advocate For Respondents No. 6.1. to 6.4. : Mr. Ravi Kumar Banjare, Advocate 16 WPC No. 1375 of 2015 1 - Ravi Jaggi S/o Shri Anil Jaggi Aged About 23 Years R/o Narmada Para Station Road Raipur, Tahsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh Civil And Revenue District Raipur Chhattisgarh , Chhattisgarh ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh S/o Through The Ministry Of Revenue, Mahandi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh , Chhattisgarh 2 - Commissioner Raipur, Division Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Collector Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Tahsildar Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 5 - Ajay Agrawal S/o Late Chhagan Lal Agrawal R/o Ramsagarpara Tahsil And District Raipur Chhattsigarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 6 - Khelan Sonkar (Died ) Through Legal Heirs In Compliance Of Honble Court Order Dated 02-12-2024., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 6.1 - 6a. Chandrika Sonkar S/o Late Khelan Sonkar, Aged About 61 Years R/o Samta Colony, Near Rahakrishna Mandir, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 6.2 - 6b. Teerath Sonkar S/o Late Khelan Sonkar Aged About 53 Years R/o Ramkund, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 17 6.3 - 6c. Santosh Sonkar S/o Late Khelan Sonkar, Aged About 55 Years R/o Ramkund, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 6.4 - 6d. Usha Sonkar D/o Late Khelan Sonkar Aged About 45 Years R/o Ramkund, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 6.5 - 6e. Lata Sonkar D/o Late Khelan Sonkar Aged About 44 Years R/o Bhatagaon, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 6.6 - 6f. Radha Sonkar D/o Late Khelan Sonkar Aged About 43 Years R/o Bhatagaon, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Ms. Shahreen Siddiqui, Advocate For Respondents No. 1 to 4 : Mr. Rahul Tamaskar, Government Advocate For Respondents No. 6.1. to 6.6. : Mr. Ravi Kumar Banjare, Advocate SB - Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order on Board 11.05.2026 1. Since common questions of law and fact are involved in all these writ petitions, therefore, they have been clubbed together, heard together and are being decided by this common order. For the sake of convenience, WPC No. 1287/2015 is treated as the leading case and the documents/annexures referred to herein are taken from the said writ petition. 18 2. This batch of writ petitions is directed against impugned order dated 20/05/2015 (Annexure P/1) passed by the Board of Revenue, Bilaspur in Revenue Revision Case No. RN/14/R/A-1/14/480/2012 whereby order dated 27/09/2012 (Annexure P/9) passed by the Additional Commissioner, Raipur Division, Raipur was set aside and order dated 30/11/2011 passed by the Upper Collector, while exercising suo moto power of revision and setting aside order dated 30/10/2006 (Annexure P/2) passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Raipur, was restored. 3. The aforesaid challenge has been made on the following factual backdrop :- (i) The dispute involved herein relates to land bearing Khasra No. 870/2(B-2) area 2,880 sq. ft. located at Village Chirduldih, Ward No. 18, Raipur which was recorded in the name of Dulaurin Bai, Widow of Shobhit Sonkar, as mourushi krishak (occupancy tenant). (ii) Khelan Sonkar i.e. grandson of Dulaurin Bai, being her only legal heir, inherited the said land and became its 19 registered owner however, the land in question was wrongly recorded as grassland in the Records of Rights. (iii) Thereafter, Khelan Sonkar filed an application under Section 57(2) of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 (hereinafter referred as, “the Land Revenue Code”) before the Sub-Divisional Officer, Raipur on the ground that he is in possession of the said land and his name is recorded as owner in the revenue records, however, a part of the said land has erroneously been recorded as grassland. (iv) The Sub-Divisional Officer, Raipur, vide order dated 30/10/2006 (Annexure P/2) allowed the application preferred by Khelan Sonkar holding that he is the bhoomiswami of the said land and is in possession of the same and part of the land has been wrongly recorded as grassland, therefore, the concerned Patwari was directed to update the revenue records. (v) Subsequently, the property in question was sold and transferred by Khelan Sonkar in favour of petitioners 20 herein from 28/11/2006 to 21/12/2010 pursuant to which petitioners became owners of the said land by virtue of registered sale deeds executed in their favour by Khelan Sonkar. (vi) Thereafter, one Ajay Agrawal (respondent herein), acting as a whistleblower, filed revision application before the Upper Collector, questioning the order dated 30/10/2006 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Raipur without impleading subsequent purchasers as necessary party/non-applicant, however, the Upper Collector, finding that Ajay Agrawal is not interested to further prosecute the revision application, proceeded to exercise its suo moto jurisdiction under Section 50 of the Land Revenue Code and vide order dated 30/11/2011 set aside the order of Sub-Divisional Officer, Raipur and directed that the subject land is a grassland and it shall be vested in the State Government. (vii) Khelan Sonkar then preferred an appeal before the Additional Commissioner challenging the order of the 21 Upper Collector whereby the Additional Commissioner, vide order dated 27/09/2012 (Annexure P/9) allowed the appeal and set aside the order passed by the upper Collector holding that it is contrary to Section 49(3) of the Land Revenue Code and subsequent purchasers ought to have been impleaded as party /non-applicant in the proceedings before the Upper Collector. (viii) Being aggrieved by the order passed by the Additional Commissioner, Ajay Agrawal preferred a revision before the Board of Revenue and on 28/04/2015, application under Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC was filed by one of the petitioners namely Sunil Kumar Agrawal before the Board of Revenue seeking impleadment of subsequent purchasers/petitioners as necessary party/non- applicant on the ground that the outcome of the 22 revision would directly affect their rights and interests being the registered owners of the suit property. However, on 12/05/2015, the said application was dismissed by the Board of Revenue on the ground that the issue involved in the case pertains to ownership rights of mourushi krishak (occupancy tenants) and the applicants/petitioners are nowhere concerned from the said issue. (ix) Ultimately, impugned order dated 20/05/2015 (Annexure P/1) was passed by the Board of Revenue and the order passed by the Upper Collector was upheld whereas the orders passed by the Additional Commissioner as well as the Sub-Divisional Officer were set aside on the ground that Khelan Sonkar has failed to prove that land belonged to the family of mourushi krishak (occupancy tenants) before the Land Revenue Code came into effect with effect from 02/10/1959 against which this batch of writ petitions have been preferred by the petitioners herein stating inter alia that they, being the subsequent purchasers and 23 bhoomiswamis of the suit land are widely interested in prosecuting the revision whereas they have not been heard and straightway final order has been passed by the Board of Revenue due to which they have suffered grievous prejudice. 4. Mr. Manoj Paranjpe, learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner in WPC No. 1287 of 2015, would submit that the Board of Revenue is absolutely unjustified in allowing the revision and rejecting the application filed by the petitioner under Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC for impleading subsequent purchasers/petitioners as necessary party/non- applicant in the revision as the petitioners are widely interested in the outcome of the revision, as such, the Board of Revenue ought to have afforded a reasonable opportunity of hearing to them prior to passing of the final order. He would rely upon the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in the matters of Amit Kumar Shaw and Anr. v. Farida Khatoon and Anr.1 as well in 1 (2005) 111 SCC 403 24 H. Anjanappa and Ors. v. A. Prabhakar and Ors.2 and lastly submit that the appeals be allowed and the order impugned passed by the Board of Revenue be set aside and direction be made to the Board of Revenue for impleading the petitioners as party/non-applicant in the revision and final order may be passed after giving them a reasonable opportunity of hearing. 5. Mr. Parag Kotecha, Mr. Adil Minhaj, Mr. Anuroop Panda and Mr. Shahreen Siddiqui, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in other writ petitions would adopt the argument advanced by learned senior counsel. 6. Per contra, Mr. Rahul Tamaskar, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents/State, would submit that the Board of Revenue is absolutely justified in allowing the appeal and setting aside the order of the Additional Commissioner and thereby restoring the order of the Upper Collector holding that the land in question is a grassland and is vested in the State Government and since the original owner of the land namely Khelan 2 2025 SCC Online SC 183 25 Sonkar was already a party, therefore, there is no need to implead the subsequent purchasers/petitioners herein, as such, this batch of writ petitions is liable to be dismissed. 7. Mr. Ravi Kumar Banjare, learned counsel appearing for the respondents/LRs of Khelan Sonkar, would submit that the land in question is ancestral property of Khelan Sonkar and he has rightly sold/transferred the said land in favour of the petitioners, therefore, the Board of Revenue is absolutely unjustified in holding that the land in question is grassland and is vested in the State Government, as such, the impugned order passed by the Board of Revenue is liable to be set aside. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection. 9. The dispute herein pertains to land bearing Khasra No. 870/2(B-2) area 2880 sq. ft. located at Village Chirduldih, Ward No. 18, Raipur which was recorded in 26 the name of Dulaurin Bai and was thereafter, inherited by her only legal heir namely Khelan Sonkar, who filed an application under Section 57(2) of the Land Revenue Code before the Sub-Divisional Officer, Raipur on the ground that he is in possession of the said land and his name is recorded as owner in the revenue records, however, a part of the said land has been erroneously recorded as grassland. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Raipur allowed the said application vide order dated 30/10/2006 (Annexure P/2) and directed to correct the revenue records accordingly. Thereafter, the said land was sold/transferred by Khelan Sonkar to petitioners herein from 28/11/2006 to 21/12/2020 by executing registered sale deeds. However, one Ajay Agrawal acted as a whistleblower and filed an appeal before the Upper Collector under Section 50 of the Land Revenue Code but though he did not show interest in prosecuting the appeal, yet the Upper Collector, in exercise of its suo moto jurisdiction, interfered with the order passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer and held that the land in 27 question is a grassland and it is vested in the State Government vide order dated 30/11/2011, which was challenged by Khelan Sonkar by way of appeal before the Additional Collector, who then set aside the order passed by the Upper Collector holding that it is hit by Section 49(3) of the Land Revenue Code and further holding that subsequent purchasers/petitioners were not impleaded as party/non-applicant. Thereafter, Ajay Agrawal challenged the order passed by the Additional Commissioner before the Board of Revenue by way of revision under Section 50 of the Land Revenue Code wherein the petitioners were yet again not impleaded as party/non-applicant due to which one of the petitioners namely Sunil Kumar Agrawal filed an application under Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC before the Board of Revenue seeking impleadment as necessary party to the proceedings, however, on 12/05/2015 (Annexure P/11), the Board of Revenue dismissed the said application holding that the issue that has to be decided is whether Khelan Sonkar held the status of mourushi krishak 28 (occupancy tenant) prior to coming into force of the Land Revenue Code and it does not concern the petitioners herein and ultimately, on 20/05/2015 (Annexure P/1), allowed the revision and set aside the order passed by the Additional Commissioner as well as the Sub-Divisional Officer and the order passed by the Upper Collector has been restored holding that the land in question is grassland and is thus vested in the State Government. 10. Admittedly, the application filed by one of the petitioners namely Sunil Kumar Agrawal under Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC has been considered and rejected by the Board of Revenue and the other petitioners though did not make an application, but the final impugned order has been passed without impleading them as a party/non-applicant in the revision and the revisioner Ajay Agrawal did have the knowledge that petitioners have purchased the said land from Khelan Sonkar, despite that he did not implead them as party/non- applicant. 29 11. At this stage, it would be appropriate to notice the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in the matter of Amit Kumar Shaw (supra) wherein it has been held in paragraph 16 as under :- “16. The doctrine of lis pendens applies only where the lis is pending before a court. Further pending the suit, the transferee is not entitled as of right to be made a party to the suit, though the court has a discretion to make him a party. But the transferee pendente lite can be added as a proper party if his interest in the subject-matter of the suit is substantial and not just peripheral. A transferee pendente lite to the extent he has acquired interest d from the defendant is vitally interested in the litigation, where the transfer is of the entire interest of the defendant; the latter having no more interest in the property may not properly defend the suit. He may collude with the plaintiff. Hence, though the plaintiff is under no obligation to make a lis pendens transferee a party, under Order 22 Rule 10 an alienee pendente lite may be joined as party. As already noticed, the court has discretion in the matter which must be judicially exercised and an alienee would ordinarily be joined as a party to enable him to protect his interests. The court has held that a transferee pendente lite of an interest in immovable property is a representative-in-interest of the party from whom he has acquired that interest. He is entitled to be impleaded in the suit or other proceedings where his predecessor-in-interest is made a party to the litigation; he is entitled 30 to be - heard in the matter on the merits of the case.” 12. Similarly, in the matter of H. Anjanappa (supra), the principle of law laid down in the matter of Amit Kumar Shaw (supra) has been followed with approval and it has been held by their Lordships that a transferee pendente lite, being an assignee of interest in the property, as envisaged under Order XXII Rule 10 CPC, can seek leave of the Court to come record on his own or at the instance of either party to the suit and it has been observed as under :- “58. From a conspectus of all the aforesaid judgments, touching upon the present aspect, broadly, the following would emerge: (I) to (vii) XXX XXX XXX (viii) Eightly, a transferee pendente lite, being an assignee of interest in the property, as envisaged under Order XXII Rule 10 CPC, can seek leave of the Court to come record on his own or at the instance of either party to the suit.” 13. In view of the aforesaid principle of law laid down by their Lordships of the Supreme Court in the matters of Amit Kumar Shaw (supra) and H. Anjannappa (supra), it is quite vivid that petitioners are vitally interested in 31 the outcome of revision as they are subsequent purchasers of the land in question and have purchased from Khelan Sonkar by registered sale deeds from 28/11/2006 to 21/12/2010 and the Additional Commissioner, in his order dated 27/09/2012, has clearly recorded a finding that the Upper Collector, though was aware of the fact that petitioners are subsequent purchasers of the land in question, yet he did not implead the petitioners as necessary party/non- applicant and without giving them a reasonable opportunity of hearing, proceeded to pass the final order and set aside the order of the Sub-Divisional Officer. The relevant portion has been extracted below :- “ ्ቚकरण क अवलो कन से ्ቢ्ቖ है क अधीनस्थ ቗ኋयालोया ቛኋर याहै पूण जानकर है न क बावजाद क वद्ቇ्ቜ से पूቈኌ" क ቈኌव्ቅया ቈኌकया जा चु%क है उसेक व्ቔमान ्ቅ ्ቔओं क अपून पू्ቌ रखन क क ई अवसेर ्ቚदन ቈኌकया ቈኌबान ቈኌववቈኌद्ቔ आदश पूरिर्ቔ ቈኌकया गया है जा क ቈኌवቈኌधी एव ्ቚक2 ቈኌ्ቔक ቗ኋया क ्ቔथ ्ቚቈኌ्ቅया क ቈኌवपूर्ቔ है ्ቔथ ቈኌनर्ቜ करन या ्ቆ है। सेथ है सेथ ्ቚकरण क अवलो कन से याहै भी ्ቢ्ቖ है क अधीनस्थ ቗ኋयालोया ቛኋर उ"रवद क पू%नर्ቌण याቈኌचुक क आधीर पूर पू%नर्ቌण क सेमाया- सेमा क 32 बा्ቨ ्ቇहैण कर ቈኌवቈኌधी एव ्ቚቈኌ्ቅया क अनदख कर ቈኌववቈኌद्ቔ आदश पूरिर्ቔ ቈኌकया है जा क ्ቭ्ቚरण से न है कर पू्ቌकर ቈኌवशष क ቛኋर ्ቚ्ቜ%्ቔ पू%नर्ቌण याቈኌचुक क आधीर पूर ቈኌववቈኌद्ቔ आदश पूरिर्ቔ ቈኌकया है जाबाቈኌक उ"रवद ቈኌहै्ቔबा्ቍ पू्ቌकर नहै है। ” 14. In that view of the matter, petitioners, being subsequent purchases of the land in question, ought to have been impleaded as a party/non-applicant in the revision and the matter ought to have been decided on merits after giving them a reasonable opportunity of hearing and the Board of Revenue even proceeded to reject the application filed by one of the petitioners namely Sunil kumar Agrawal under Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC seeking impleadment as a party/non-applicant in the revision by order dated 12/05/2015, which is absolutely inadmissible and bad in law and by the said act of the revenue authorities, the petitioners herein have suffered grave prejudice. Thus, in view of the aforesaid legal discussion, the impugned order dated 20/05/2015 (Annexure P/1) is hereby set aside and matter is remitted to the Board of Revenue for impleading the 33 petitioners as party/non-applicants in the revision on their submitting application for impleadment and thereafter, fresh final order shall be passed on merits after giving due opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, absolutely in accordance with law. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter. 15. Accordingly, this batch of writ petitions is allowed to the extent indicated herein-above. No cost(s). Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Harneet