HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Order Sheet
WPPIL No. 33 of 2021
Ravi Kumar Yadav S/o Ramkhilawan Yadav Aged About 32 Years R/o Lalpur , Police Station Balodabazar, Tehsil Bhatapara , District Balodabazar Bhatapara.
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Development Of Urban Administration And Development, Mantralay, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur
2. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management Mantralay Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur
3. The Collector Balodabazar District Bhatapara
4. Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Tehsil Paniyan, District Bhatapara.
5. The Tehsildar Tehsil Paniyan, District Bhatapara
6. Municipal Corporation Balodabazar, Through The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation Balodabazar District Bhatapara Chhattisgarh.
7. Dhanadhar S/o Shri Mohan Yadu Aged About 35 Years R/o Lalpur, Tehsil Bhatapara, District Balodabazar Chhattisgarh.
8. Karan S/o Shri Gangadalyal Yadu Aged About 62 Years R/o Lalpur, Tehsil Bhatapara , District Balodabazar Chhattisgarh. 9. Kartik Yadav (Minor) S/o Shri Shrawan Kumar Yadav Aged About 5 Years Guardian Shri Vishnu Prasad Yadav (Grand Father Of Kartik Yadav) , S/o Late Rati Ram Yadav , Aged About 66 Years, R/o Lalpur , Tehsil Bhatapara , District Balodabazar Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondents
Proceedings through Video Conferencing
29/7/2021
Ms. Shivali Dubey, counsel for the petitioner.
Mr. Sudeep Agrawal, Dy.A.G. for the State.
Heard.
I.A. No.03/2021, application for amendment of the writ petition
is considered and allowed.
Let necessary incorporation be made within a week, thereafter,
petitioner shall pay process fee for service of notice on newly added
respondent.
Learned State counsel submits that the subject tank is a private tank.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the private respondents are selling the land recorded as tank. She would further submit that irrespective of the issue of ownership, land under water cannot be sold for any other purpose. She would refer to the judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in the matter of Jagpal Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Ors. {(2011) 11 SCC 396}.
Let the matter be posted for consideration in the week commencing 06.9.2021.
In the meanwhile, parties shall maintain status quo, in respect of possession and there shall be no alienation of any part of the land covered within the khasra number recorded as tank.
(Prashant Kumar Mishra) (Narendra Kumar Vyas)
Acting Chief Justice Judge
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
D.B.:- Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava
Hon'ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor
Order On Board
14/09/2021
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing certain records we find that case is regarding dispute of title over the pond which is subject matter of dispute in the writ petition.
2. State's records contain not only revenue records in which private person's name is on record but also there are certain records in which the land is being used for nistari purposes by the villagers. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that land is a nistari land but wrongly recorded in the name of private persons. Therefore, they should be removed and pond be set free.
3. In our opinion, it can be decided only after going through the entire records, history with regard to creation and abolition, interest and title of the pond which pertains to abolition of proprietary rights of ex-malguzar. The case involves disputed facts and factual enquiry which would require not only minute scrutiny of revenue records but may also require oral evidence. The Land Revenue Code provides mechanism and remedy where complaint is made to revenue authority that the pond was being used as nistari purposes and used exclusively by the villagers, but wrongly recorded in the ownership of private persons.
4. Therefore, we are of the opinion that this writ petition should be disposed off with the direction to the Collector, Balodabazar to entrust the matter for due enquiry by a competent authority to deal with complaints regarding encroachment on nistari pond of the village. The competent authority shall institute proceedings by issuing due notice not only to the villagers but also to its recorded owner. The enquiry should be made within an outer limit of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order by the Collector. The security amount of Rs.5,000/- be refunded and appropriate records of refund be attached with the records of the present case.The petition is accordingly disposed off.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) (Vimla Singh Kapoor)
Judge Judge
No comments:
Post a Comment