2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the Tehsildar Barsoor, District Dantewada has passed an order on 06.05.2024 by which the name of the petitioner was directed to be mutated in the revenue record by invoking the powers under Sections 109 and 110 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 (in short, the Code). The said order was challenged by the respondents before the SDO(Revenue) Geedam, District Dantewada by filing First Appeal under Section 44(1) of the Code which was decided on 15.01.2025 and thereafter they have filed the Second Appeal before the Collector, Dantewada. The Collector, Dantewada, allowed the Second Appeal filed by the respondents vide order dated 19.08.2026 and the orders passed by the Tehsildar Barsar dated 06.05.2024 and SDO(Revenue) Geedam dated 15.01.2025 are set aside. She would further submit that the subject land was settled in favour of the petitioner vide order passed by Tehsildar, Dantewada dated 04.01.2003. Since the subject land was settled in favour of the petitioner, the names of respondents cannot be mutated as co-sharer of the subject land for which the petitioner is claiming for correction of revenue records and for deletion of name of respondents which was rightly considered by the Tehsildar Barsoor and SDO(Revenue) Geedam, however, without any sufficient reason, the Collector, Dantewada allowed the appeal and set aside the orders passed by Tehsildar and SDO. Therefore, the impugned order may be set aside and the orders passed by Tehsildar Barsoor and SDO (Revenue) Geedam may be restored.
