GRAM PANCHAYAT IMLAJ Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RESPONDENT No. 3 being aggrieved by the order passed under section 251 of the M.P. Land Revenue Code, directing that the tank in dispute stands vested in the State Government, challenged the order. The matter went upto the Board of Revenue and was remanded back. Even after the remand, no orders could be passed in favour of the respondent No. 3 but the Board of Revenue ultimately decided in favour of respondent No. 3 holding that an order under section 251 of the M.P.L.R. could not be passed against the interest of respondent No. 3. The said order is under challenge before this Court.

(2.) IT was contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that as it was a public tank and the people had their nistar rights, the competent authority, i.e. the Sub -Divisional Officer was empowered to pass an order under section 251, directing vesting of the tank in the State.

(3.) SHRI Sinha learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Board of Revenue misdirected itself by relying upon the revenue entries without appreciating that the presumption attached to the revenue entries as provided under section 117 of the Code is in relation to the entry made under Chapter IX only. He submits that as the entries are in relation to nistar and Wajub -ul -arz, the presumption available under section 117 would not be available.