High Court dismissed writ petition challenging the dismissal of a revenue appeal. The court rejected substantive objections regarding contractor status and lack of independent witnesses against concurrent findings of revenue authorities.
Writ petition dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
WP227 No. 2691 of 2008
---- Petitioner
Versus
---- Respondent
For Petitioner : Mr. Mayank Chandrakar, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Arun Sao, Dy.A.G.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Pritinker Diwaker
Order On Board
02/07/2015
Challenge in the present writ petition is to the order dated 28.12.2007 passed
by the Board of Revenue, Circuit Court, Jagdalpur in Revenue Appeal No.A/01/R-A67/214/2007 dismissing the appeal as preferred by the petitioner assailing the order dated 14.2.2007 passed by the Additional Collector, Jagdalpur under Section 247(7) of CG Land Revenue Code.
trucks and other workers had informed the revenue authority that murum is being extracted and transported at the instance of the petitioner. Panchanama dated 7.7.2002 was prepared which was duly signed by the drivers and labourers. The revenue inspector submitted his report and it was found that market value of the murum was Rs.1.12 lacs and the royalty of the same comes to Rs.32,000/-. After registering a revenue case, show cause notice was issued by the Additional Collector of which reply was submitted by the petitioner denying the allegations as made. Vide order dated 14.2.2007 passed by the Additional Collector fine of Rs.10,000/- was imposed on the petitioner under Section 247(7) of the CG Land Revenue Code. The petitioner preferred an appeal before the Board of Revenue, but the same was also dismissed by the impugned order.
the revenue authorities and therefore, in the petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the same cannot be entertained with.
Sd/-
(Pritinker Diwaker)
JUDGE
Khan
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with concurrent findings of revenue authorities dismissing the appeal regarding illegal extraction of murum.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Bhojaraj Dahaiya
Board Of Revenue Circuit Court, Jagdalpur
Additional Collector, Jagdalpur
Mining Officer Jagdalpur
Pritinker Diwaker
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
