1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
W.P.(C) No. 3349 of 2020
1. Shailesh Yadav, son of Jwahir Lal Yadav, aged about 30 years,
2. Sunil Yadav, son of Sahadan Yadav, aged about 35 years,
3. Narendra Yadav, son of Jamuna Yadav, aged about 32 years,
4. Muneshwar Yadav, son of Ram Subhag Yadav, aged about 60 years
All are resident of village Malgawakhurd, Tahsil Ambikapur, District
Sarguja (C.G.)
---- Petitioners
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh Through its Secretary, Department of Panchayat
and Rural Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar,
Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)
2. Collector Ambikapur, District Sarguja (C.G.)
3. Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Ambikapur, District Sarguja (C.G.)
4. Naib Tahsildar, Ambikapur – 2, District Sarguja (C.G.)
5. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat Ambikapur, District Sarguja
(C.G.)
6. Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Ambikapur, District Sarguja
(C.G.)
7. Krishna Yadav, son of Ram Lakhan Yadav, Up Sarpanch of Gram
Panchayat Malgawakhurd, Tahsil Ambikapur, District Sarguja (C.G.)
---- Respondents
For Petitioners : Ms. Sangeeta Soni, Advocate
For State/Respondents No. 1 to 4 : Mr. Shashank Thakur,
Deputy Advocate General
For Respondent No. 7 : Mr. Achyut Tiwari, Advocate
Hon'ble Shri Rakesh Mohan Pandey, Judge
Order On Board
30.04.2024
1. The petitioners have filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):-
“10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be
pleased to issue the writ, order or directions to the
respondents authorities to call for the entire record
pertaining to the case of the respondent no. 7 for
issuing notice, in the interest of justice.
2
10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be
pleased to issue the writ, order or directions to the
respondents authorities to consider the pending
application (Annexure P-1) of the petitioner, in the
interest of justice.
10.3 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be
pleased to issue the writ, order or directions to the
respondents authorities to terminate the private
respondent No. 7 from the post of Up Sarpanch and to
remove the private respondent No. 7 from the
government land which is illegal constructed the
house by the Private respondent No. 7, in the interest
of justice.
10.4 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be
pleased to issue the writ, order or directions to the
respondents authorities to enquire the matter in the
interest of justice.
10.5 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be
pleased to issue any other writ or writs / order or
orders / direction or directions which the Hon’ble Court
deemed fit and proper in the interest of justice.”
2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the
private respondent i.e. respondent No. 7 has encroached on the
government land bearing survey Nos. 363/1 and 363/2 admeasuring
3.332 and 1.1380 hectares situated at Village Malgawakhurd, Patwari
Circle No. 03, Tehsil Ambikapur, District Surguja and he is raising
construction over it. She would further submit that though the
complaints have been made to various authorities, no action has been
taken yet.
3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents would oppose.
4. Learned counsel for the State would submit that the petitioners may
file an application as per the provisions of Section 248 of the CG. Land
Revenue Code, 1959 before the concerned Tehsildar and if such an
3
application is moved by the petitioners, appropriate action would be
taken by the authorities,
5. Learned counsel for respondent No. 7 would submit that respondent
No. 7 has not encroached on government land as narrated by the
petitioners in the present petition.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
documents placed on the record.
7. Taking into consideration the fact that the petitioners have a remedy to
move an application before the Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) under
Section 248 of the CG. Land Revenue Code, 1959, this petition, at this
juncture, is disposed with liberty to the petitioners to move an
appropriate application before the concerned authority and the
authority concerned is directed to take an informed decision on the
application so moved by the petitioners strictly in accordance with law
after affording due opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned.
8. With the aforesaid direction(s), the petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
(Rakesh Mohan Pandey)
Judge
vatti