1 2025:CGHC:10253 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1168 of 2025 1 Hiralal Markam S/o Late Dondi Ram Aged About 56 Years R/o House No. 28, Schoolpara, Village Baijanpuri, Police Station And Tahsil Vishrampuri, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 Secretary Department Of Forest And Climate Change, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 Secretary Department Of Tribal And Schedule Caste, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur Chhattisgarh 4 Collector Kondagaon, Distt. Kondagaon 5 Divisional Forest Officer Forest Divisional Keshkal, Distt. JYOTI SHARMA Digitally signed by JYOTI SHARMA Date: 2025.03.05 10:15:53 +0530 2 Kondagaon Chhattisgarh 6 Assistant Commissioner/ District Tribal Welfare Officer Tribal Development, Kondagaon, Distt. Kondagaon Chhattisgarh 7 Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Sub Division Keshkal, Distt. Kondagaon Chhattisgarh 8 Tahsildar Tahsil Vishrampuri Distt. Kondagaon Chhattisgarh 9 Forest Range Officer Forest Range Vishrampuri, Distt. Kondagaon Chhattisgarh 10 Secretary Gram Panchayat Baijanpuri, Tahsil Vishrampuri, Distt. Kondagaon Chhattisgarh 11 Secretary Forest Right Committee, Village Baijanpuri, Tahsil Vishrampuri, Distt. Kondagaon Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Shri Kishore Narayan, Advocate For Respondent(s)/ State : Shri Keshav Prasad Gupta, G.A. Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 03/03/2025 Heard. 3 1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner is question the communication dated 29.01.2025 (Annexure P-4) and 30.01.2025 (Annexure P-5). 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that forest land has been allotted to the petitioner on lease by District Level Committee and the decision of the District Level Committee is final and binding on all. He further submits that the forest right granted by the committee shall not be reopened by any authority. 3. Learned State counsel on instructions submits that communication dated 29.01.2025 (Annexure P-4) and 30.01.2025 (Annexure P-5) is not regarding reopening of forest right granted to the petitioner. He further submits that there are some allegations of illegal encroachment and the contention of the petitioner is not correct. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the communication which is under challenge Annexure P-4 and P- 5. 5. Perusal of communication appears that the respondents are not reopening the forest right granted to the petitioner and even the State counsel has made a statement that the communication which is under challenge is not for reopening of the forest right given to the petitioner and this a proceeding only to protect the forest land and the excess land encroached upon by the petitioner. 4 6. Considering the same, I am of the view that the writ petition filed by the petitioner is pre mature at this stage and if any proceeding is drawn for cancellation of the forest right granted to the petitioner or for reopening of the forest right granted to the petitioner, the petitioner will be at liberty to challenge the same before the appropriate authority. 7. With the aforesaid observation, the petition stands disposed off. Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) JUDGE Jyoti