MAYARAM Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition arises out of the proceedings initiated by the Revenue Authorities under Section 170-B of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the Code) whereby all the Revenue Authorities, except the Collector, have held that the petitioner's possession is unauthorised over the suit property owned by one Gulab Singh, an aboriginal, and directed for reversion of the land in question to him.

(2.) Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners, namely, Taturam, by virtue of the registered deed of sale dated 17.12.1986, purported to have been executed by one Gulab Singh [since deceased now represented by his legal representatives respondents No.6 (a) to 6 (g)], an aboriginal, acquired valid right, title and interest over the property in question, i.e., part of Kh.No.103/1 admeasuring 1.33 acres, as mentioned in the alleged sale, situated at village Ramtala, Tahsil Pandaria, District Kawardha (C.G.)

(3.) After the insertion of Section 170-B of the Code on the commencement of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code (Amendment) Act, 1980 (Act No.15 of 1980) (hereinafter referred to as the Amendment Act of 1980), which came into force w.e.f. 24.10.1980, a report was submitted by the concerned Revenue Inspector on 28.09.1996 to the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue), Lormi, through Tahsildar Pendra stating therein that the petitioner is in possession over the suit land, however, the Collector's permission is not mentioned in the Sansodhan Panji. Based upon the said information, a show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner by the Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Lormi, directing him to furnish the particulars that under what capacity he has come in possession over the land in question, belonging to the aboriginal tribe, else his possession would be deemed to be unauthorised.