Naushad Abdul Manan Khan vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Learned counsel appearing for the parties would jointly submit that this matter is covered by the decision rendered by this Court in WPC No. 1237

of 2016 in Smt. Darshana Devi v. State of Chhattisgarh, decided on 10.05.2016, in which this Court has observed as under :-

 “4. The issue whether issuance of notice would be necessary to the party in whose favour the order, sought to be reviewed, was passed, need

not detain this Court any longer because principles of natural justice has been violated. The order which was sought to be reviewed and in respect of

which permission was obtained from SDO was admittedly passed in favour of the petitioner. Therefore, exercise of review undertaken under Section

51 of the Land Revenue Code necessarily requires notices to be issued to the petitioner. In taking this view, I am supported by the order passed by the

Division Bench of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in the case of Biharilal v. State of M.P. and others and connected matter1 and another order of

the Division Bench in the case of Shaheed Anwar v. Board of Revenue and another2.

In view of the above, impugned orders cannot be sustained in law and are set aside. The concerned authority however shall be at liberty to initiate

fresh proceedings after affording proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

The petition is accordingly allowed.â€​

In view of the above, this writ petition is also disposed of and the impugned orders dated 23.03.2015 and 15.04.2015 (Annexure â€" P/1) are hereby

set aside. However, the respondents would be at liberty to proceed further in accordance with law.

With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands finally disposed of. No order as to cost(s).