AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Vishal Mishra, J
Counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that the application under Section 89 of M.P. Land Revenue Code has been filed before Tehsildhar for
correction of the area/map. The aforesaid application was allowed by the Tahsildhar. It is argued by the petitioner that petitioner was not a party to
the proceedings of the order passed by the Tahsildhar. Against which, the petitioner has preferred an appeal before the S.D.O. but without going
through the contention of the appellant/petitioner, the S.D.O. has rejected the application being barred by limitation. Against which, a Second Appeal
has been filed before the Commissioner. The same was also rejected. It is submitted that there is a specific provisions that the powers for correction
of entries is vested with the S.D.O. but the Tahsildhar was having no jurisdiction to correct the entries.
Apart from this, the petitioner was not a party to the proceedings and the area of the petitioner bearing Survey No.1473 have been reduced to 0.22
hectare.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the effect and operation of the order impugned is stayed till the next date of hearing.
List in the week commencing 8th March, 2021.
Certified copy as per rules.