Revenue authorities must undertake pending land demarcation after notice under Section 129.

The petitioners claimed rights over land bearing Khasra Nos. 453/1 and 454/1, admeasuring 0.206 hectare, situated at Village Torwa, Bilaspur, purchased through a registered sale deed dated 20.10.1970.

Alleging unauthorised interference and construction, they initiated proceedings under Section 250 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959.

The Tahsildar directed restoration of possession on 17.09.2009, but the Sub-Divisional Officer set aside that order on 30.12.2009.

In appeal, the Commissioner, Bilaspur Division, by order dated 29.05.2011, set aside the orders of the subordinate revenue authorities and directed the Tahsildar to conduct proper demarcation, provide both parties an opportunity to lead evidence, and decide the matter on merits.

The petitioners alleged that, despite submitting an application for demarcation, the Commissioner’s directions had not been implemented.

The State disputed the existence or proof of such an application.

Whether the respondents could be directed to implement the Commissioner’s order dated 29.05.2011 by conducting demarcation and proceeding in accordance with law.

Whether, in the absence of material establishing the filing or pendency of the earlier application for demarcation, the petitioners should be permitted to submit a fresh application for the same relief.

The Court applied the directions contained in the Commissioner’s order dated 29.05.2011, which required proper demarcation of the disputed land, an opportunity of hearing and evidence to all concerned parties, and a decision on merits.

The Court further directed that any fresh demarcation proceedings be undertaken in accordance with Section 129 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959, and the rules framed thereunder, including due notice to all concerned or interested parties.

The Court recognised that the Commissioner’s order remained operative and specifically contemplated demarcation before further adjudication.

However, the petitioners could not produce the earlier application allegedly filed in 2011, while the State questioned whether such an application had ever been submitted and pointed to the considerable passage of time.

Rather than determining disputed factual matters regarding the earlier application, the Court adopted a practical procedural course: it permitted the petitioners to file a fresh application accompanied by a certified copy of the Commissioner’s order.

If demarcation had not already been undertaken, the competent revenue authority was required to initiate and complete the proceedings after notice to all concerned parties and in conformity with Section 129 of the Code and the Commissioner’s directions.

The petitioners were directed to submit a fresh application to the competent revenue authority within 10 days of receiving the certified copy of the High Court’s order, annexing a certified copy of the Commissioner’s order dated 29.05.2011.

If demarcation had not already been conducted, the authority was directed to consider the application, undertake and complete the demarcation proceedings with due notice, and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law.

There was no order as to costs.