1 2025:CGHC:1380 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 92 of 2025 1 - Neelkanth Sahu S/o Panchamram Sahu Aged About 51 Years R/o Village - Sankri, Tahsil - Gundardehi, District - Balod (C.G.). ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Mahanadi Bhavan, Atal Nagar, Raipur (C.G.). 2 - The Collector, District - Balod (C.G.). 3 - The Sub Divisional Officer (R), Gundardehi, District - Balod (C.G.). 4 - The Tahsildar, Gundardehi, District - Balod (C.G.). 5 - The Revenue Inspector, Gundardehi, District - Balod (C.G.). 6 - The Mal Jamadar, Gundardehi, District - Balod (C.G.). 7 - Smt. Chandrakali Sahu W/o Balram Sahu Aged About 53 Years R/o Village- Sankari, Tahsil - Gundardehi, District - Balod (C.G.). ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Rajkumar Pali, Advocate. For Respondents/State : Mr. Anmol Sharma, Panel Lawyer. AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Digitally signed by AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Date: 2025.01.17 18:34:41 +0530 2 Hon'ble Justice Shri Bibhu Datta Guru Order on Board 09/01/2025 1. In the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following relief:- “this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records from the possession of the respondent authorities pertaining to the case of the petitioner for its kind perusal. 10.2. this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the petition and direct the respondent authorities to take necessary steps against the respondent Nos.5 & 6 for not compliance the order dated 31/05/2024. 10.3 any other relief or reliefs which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit or proper in the facts and circumstances of the case including cost of the litigation.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a land holder of the Khasra No.478/2 Plot No.43, which is situated at village Sankri. The respondent No.7 forcibly encroached the land of the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an application under Section 250 of the Land Revenue Code before the concerned Tahsil Office and on the basis of pleadings of all the 3 parties, the Tahsildar found that the respondent No.7 was illegaly encroached the land of the petitioner. He further submits that the final order has already been passed by the revenue authorities in favour of the petitioner, but the respondent Nos.5 & 6 have not taken steps for removal of encroachment from the respondent No.7. 3. Learned counsel for the State/respondent has no objection to the limited prayer made by the petitioner. 4. Heard learned counsel for both the parties. 5. Having considered the submission made by learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the record, it appears that in spite of the order Annexure P-6 dated 31/05/2024, the Tahsildar passed an order pdirecting the removal of the encroachment from the respondent No.7, but no steps are being taken for removal of the encroachment from the respondent No.7, hence, the Collector, District-Balod/respondent No.2 is directed to look into the grievance of the petitioner and take necessary steps for removal of the encroachment from the respondent No.7 within a period of thirty days from the period of receipt of copy of this order. 6. With the aforesaid observation and directions, the writ petition is disposed of. SD/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Amardeep