1 CGHC010316312026 2026:CGHC:39411 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR REVP No. 245 of 2026 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Collector, District- Bilaspur. 2 - The Commissioner (Revenue) Bilaspur Division, (C.G.) 3 - The Tahsildar, Bilaspur, Revenue And Civil Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Petitioners versus 1 - Biman Roy S/o- Late Shri Shashank Shekhar Roy, Aged About 56 Years R/o- Surya Vihar, Seepat Road, Sarkanda, Bilaspur (C.G.) Petitioner No.1 In The Writ Petition. 2 - Mr. Vivek Roy S/o- Late Shri Shashank Shekhar Roy, Aged About 54 Years R/o- Behind Sheela Niwas, Madhuban Road, Sarkanda, Bilaspur (C.G.) Petitioner No.2 In The Writ Petition. 3 - Mr. Samar Nayak S/o- Late Shashank Shekhar Roy, Behind Sheela Niwas, Madhu Bhan Road, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. Res. No. 4 In The Writ Petition. 4 - Mr. Vikas Nayak, S/o- Late Shashank Shekhar Roy, Opposite Narang Niwas, Madhu Bhan Road, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. Res. No. 5 In The Writ Petition. 5 - Nilesh Gupta, S/o- Shri Babulal Gupta R/o- Punjabi Colony, Shanti Niketan School, Dayal Bandh (C.G.) Res. No. 6 In The Writ Petition. ... Respondents (Cause title taken from CIS system) For Petitioners : Mr. Sabyasachi Choubey, G.A. For Respondents : Mr. Tessy Abraham, Advocate Digitally signed by AMIT PATEL 2 Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 09.09.2026 1. Learned counsel for the petitioners/State submits that the present review petition has been preferred seeking review of the order dated 06.05.2026 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No. 2130/2026, whereby the writ petition was disposed of with a direction to respondent No. 2, Commissioner, Bilaspur Division, Bilaspur, to decide the pending revenue appeal/proceedings bearing Case No. 73/A-6/2018-19 expeditiously, preferably within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of the said order. It is further submitted that the aforesaid Revenue Case No. 73/A- 6/2018-19, registered online as Case No. 201903990100006 /72/A-6/2018-19, had already been decided by the learned Commissioner, Bilaspur Division, Bilaspur, vide order dated 06.08.2025. Therefore, the direction issued by this Court vide order dated 06.05.2026 in W.P.(C) No. 2130/2026 could not have been complied with, as the proceedings in question had already attained finality prior thereto. Learned counsel for the applicants further submits that the writ petitioner had failed to disclose the aforesaid material fact before this Court and had obtained the order dated 06.05.2026 by suppressing material facts. It is, therefore, contended that the order under review has been obtained by the writ petitioner by placing incomplete facts before the Court, resulting in an order which is incapable of compliance. 3 On these grounds, learned counsel submits that paragraphs No. 8, 9 & 10 of the order dated 06.05.2026 passed in W.P.(C) No. 2130/2026 deserves to be reviewed and suitably modified in the interest of justice. 2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 & 2 submits that the said respondents are not aware about passing of the order dated 06.05.2026 as it was passed behind their back. 3. From perusal of the order dated 06.08.2025 passed by the learned Commissioner, Division- Bilaspur, it is clear that the aforesaid revenue proceedings had already been decided prior to the order dated 06.05.2026 was passed by this Court. However, this fact was not brought to the notice of the Court at the time of passing the said order. As a result, this Court, considering the proceedings to be pending, directed the concerned Commissioner to decide the same within a period of 30 days. Since the proceedings had already been decided on 06.08.2025, the direction contained in paragraphs 8, 9 & 10 of the order dated 06.05.2026 cannot be acted upon and, therefore, paragraph 8 of the said order is required to be deleted. 4. Accordingly, the review petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent. The order dated 06.05.2026 passed in W.P.(C) No. 2130/2026 is modified and paragraphs No. 8, 9 & 10 thereof are deleted. 5. However, Since the order has already passed by the concerned Commissioner, Bilaspur Division on 06.08.2025, the Respondent 4 Nos. 1 & 2 are at liberty to challenge the aforesaid order in accordance with law. 6. The counsel appearing on behalf of the State and Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 should be vigilant while arguing matters and they should apprise the true facts of the case. 7. The concerned parties should ensure that any statement made before this Court should not be factually incorrect as it creates unnecessary confusion before the authority concern. SD/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge AMIT PATEL