RESHAM LAL ALIAS BADRI PRASAD PATEL Vs. MANU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition, the petitioner has challenged legality and propriety of the order dated 8-1-98 passed by the Commissioner, Bilaspur Division, Bilaspur in Revision Case No.98/A-23/96-97, whereby the order passed by the subordinate revenue officer under Section 170B of the Madhya Pradesh/Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code 1959 (for short 'the Code') has been maintained and also directed to return the possession of land to respondent No. 1, 2 and 3 herein as members of Cast Saunra.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner, at the outset, submits that this petition involves short question that whether caste Saunra is included in the notification issued under clause (1) of Article 342 of the Constitution of India, in the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950. Learned counsel further submits that respondents No.l to 3 herein are members of Saunra caste which is not included in the order issued by the President of India under clause (1) of Article 342 of the Constitution of India and only Castes Saur, Sawar, Sawara and Sonr have been included in the aforesaid order/list. Therefore, Saunra is not member of tribe and any transaction between the member of Saunra caste and the petitioner herein is not hit by Section 170B of the Code.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner also submits that in absence of the fact that respondents No.l, 2 and 3 herein are members of Scheduled Tribe, the transaction may be fraudulent in nature, but is not hit by Section 170B of the Code.