State Of Chhattisgarh Vs Murli Chauhan — Chhattisgarh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

State Of Chhattisgarh Vs Murli Chauhan — Chhattisgarh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of in the same terms as W.P.(227) No. 490 of 2012 (State of Chhattisgarh and ors v. Munna) and allowed; the impugned order dated 22.10.2010 passed by the Board of Revenue, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh is set aside; the respondents are left at liberty to seek permission for transfer of the land afresh under Sections 165(6)(ii) and 165(7) of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959, to be decided strictly in accordance with law.

Issue for consideration

Whether the order dated 22.10.2010 passed by the Board of Revenue, Chhattisgarh permitting respondent No.1 to sell his agricultural land (Khasra numbers totaling 2.442 hectares) to respondent No.2 under Section 8 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959, with directions for issuance of the Sale Parchi and registration of the sale deed, should be sustained or set aside.

Court's answer

Since the issue involved in this writ petition has already been decided by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in State of Chhattisgarh and ors v. Munna (W.P.(227) No. 490 of 2012 and other connected matters, delivered on 06.04.2022), this writ petition is disposed of in the same terms as the order passed in that matter.

Ratio / Principle

The writ petitions are allowed and the impugned order dated 22.10.2010 passed by the Board of Revenue, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh is set aside.

Key takeaways

The respective respondents are at liberty to file appropriate applications before the competent authority as prescribed under Sections 165(6)(ii) and 165(7) of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 seeking permission for transfer of their land, and if any such application is filed, the competent authority shall decide the same strictly in accordance with law.ratio¶¶31

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 — Permission to sell agricultural land — Board of Revenue, by order dated 22.10.2010 in Murli Chauhan vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Others, allowed respondent No.1's application under Section 8 and permitted sale of agricultural land (various Khasra numbers totaling 2.442 hectares) to respondent No.2, directing issuance of the 22-point form (Sale Parchi) and registration of the sale deed — State authorities challenged the order in WP227 No. 571 of 2013 — Held, disposing of the petition in the same terms as the co-ordinate Bench decision in State of Chhattisgarh and ors v. Munna, W.P.(227) No. 490 of 2012 and connected matters (decided 06.04.2022): writ petition allowed; impugned order dated 22.10.2010 set aside; respondents at liberty to move the competent authority under Sections 165(6)(ii) and 165(7) of the Code for permission to transfer the land, such applications to be decided strictly in accordance with law. (Rakesh Mohan Pandey, J.; decided 17.04.2025; NAFR)

-1-

Digitally signed by NADIM MOHLE

2025:CGHC:17613

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

WP227 No. 571 of 2013

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Collector, P.S. Chakradhar Nagar District Raigarh Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh

2 - The Tahsildar Raigarh, P.S. Chakradhar Nagar District Raigarh Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh

3 - The Sub Registrar Raigarh, P.S. Chakradhar Nagar District Raigarh Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh

... Petitioner(s)

versus

1 - Murli Chauhan S/o S/o Shri Mahadeo Chauhan Aged About 45 Years Caste - Gada, R/o Village Odekera, Raigarh, P.S. Pusoure, Raigarh, Tahsil And District Raigarh Chhattisgarh., Chhattisgarh

2 - Dinesh Kumar Agrawal S/o S/o Shri Govind Ram Agrawal R/o Raigarh, P.S. City Kotwali Raigarh Tahsil And District Raigarh Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh

3 - The Board Of Revenue S/o Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

... Respondent(s)

(Cause Title is taken from Case Information System)

For Petitioners/State : Mr. Ranbir Singh Marhas, Additional Advocate General

For Respondent No.1 : Mr. Ashish Gupta, Advocate

-2-

For Respondent No.2 : Mr. C. Jayant K. Rao, Advocate

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey

Order on Board

17.04.2025

1. In this petition, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 22.10.2010 passed by the Board of Revenue, Chhattisgarh, in the case Murli Chauhan vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Others . By the said order, the Board of Revenue allowed an application filed by respondent No.1 under Section 8 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959, granting him permission to sell certain agricultural lands to respondent No.2. The Board of Revenue also directed the Tahsildar and Halka Patwari to issue the 22-point form (Sale Parchi) for various Khasra numbers, totaling 2.442 hectares, and instructed the Sub-Registrar to register the sale deed in favour of the purchaser (respondent No.2).

1. Mr. Ranbir Singh Marhas, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State/petitioners, submits that the issue involved in this writ petition has already been decided by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the matter of State of Chhattisgarh and ors v. Munna passed in W.P.(227) No. 490 of 2012 and other connected matters, delivered on 06.04.2022. Therefore, this petition may also be disposed of in terms of the said order.

1. The prayer is not opposed by the other side.

1. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of in the same terms as the order passed in W.P.(227) No. 490 of 2012 and other connected matters. A copy of the

-3-

said order shall be part of this order. Consequently, the writ petitions are allowed. The impugned order dated 22.10.2010 passed by the Board of Revenue,

Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh is hereby set aside .

1. The respective respondents shall be at liberty to file appropriate applications before the competent authority as prescribed under Section 165(6)(ii) and 165(7) of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959, seeking permission for transfer of

their land. If any such application is filed, the competent authority shall decide the same strictly in accordance with law.

Sd/-

(Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge

Nadim