respect to holding the service land. Section 183 (3) of the Code, 1959 is very specific, that when the holder of such land dies, resigns or is lawfully dismissed the land shall pass to his successor in office. This provision does not grant proprietary right to a Kotwar in any manner and there being specific provision under Section 183 (3) of the Code, 1959, it is the successor who shall be entitled to hold the service land subsequent to the death of the previous Kotwar. In this particular case, the previous village Kotwar had been Shankar Devdas, who is now deceased. Respondent No.1 – Smt. Kalyani Bai, who temporarily worked as Kotwar is no longer holding that post, therefore, the petitioner is the successor to the post of village Kotwar of village Mudhena, Mahasamund. In view of the principles laid down by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Gambhir Das Panika (supra) and the entitlement of the petitioner as per the provisions of law which is mentioned herein-above, the petitioner has entitlement for grant of service land, which has been erroneously granted to respondent No.1. Hence, on the basis of the discussions, the petition is allowed. The impugned order passed by the Chhattisgarh Revenue Board dated 7.7.2015 (Annexure-P/1) and the order of the Additional Commissioner dated 5.7.2012 (Annexure-P/5) both are erroneous and unsustainable, hence, they are set aside. The order passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Revenue dated 9.10.2009 (AnnexureP/4) is upheld and restored.
