1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1398 of 2025 1 - Nisha Bose W/o Arup Bose Aged About 42 Years R/o Sarnarthi Schoolpara, Digma, Raghavpuri, Ambikapur, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, General Administration Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralay, Capital Complex, New Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Collector, Balod District Balod, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Nayab Tahsildar, Balod District Balod, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioners : Mr. Malay Shrivastava, Advocate. For State : Mr. Satish Gupta, G.A. Hon’ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 17.03.2025 VISHAKHA BEOHAR Digitally signed by VISHAKHA BEOHAR 2 1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking following reliefs:- “10.1. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly direct the respondent authorities to intervene, declare their rightful ownership of the suit land, and direct the authorities to issue the patta while halting any unauthorized construction or use of the land by third parties. 10.2. Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper, may also kindly be granted to the petitioners, in the interest of justice.” 2. The petitioner has filed this writ petition interalia pleading that she is the native resident of village Nehrunagar (Digma), Ambikapur, Surguja, Chhattisgarh, belonging to a displaced Bengali family of the Namoshudh caste, following Hindu customs and laws. The petitioner claims that her ancestors were refugees of erstwhile East Bengal, who have been rehabilitated by the Government of India after independence. Some land bearing Khasra No. 308, admeasuring 0.600 hectares in Nehrunagar was allocated to their ancestor namely Jitendra Nath Mandal in 1967-68 by the Former Housing Department as part of rehabilitation for displaced families. Since then, the petitioner's family has been in continuous possession of the said land and has cultivated it. Despite applying for a land patta (title deed), the petitioner has not received it, and the land remains registered under the Chhattisgarh State. In the year 2024, the Chhattisgarh State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited (CGSCSCL) began constructing a road on land adjacent 3 to the petitioner's property. When the petitioner obtained information under Right to Information (RTI) application, she discovered that the suit land had been allotted to the CGSCSCL. Being aggrieved by the said act of the concerned respondent authorities, the present petition has been filed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the said suit land has been allotted to the ancestors of the petitioner as part of rehabilitation for displaced families way back in the year 1967-68, following by the petitioner's family and they have been in peaceful possession and cultivation of the said land since year 1967-68. It is stated that despite repeated applications, the concerned respondent authorities have failed to issue a patta (title deed) for the suit land, leaving it registered under the Chhattisgarh State. It is also submitted that subsequently in the year 2024, the said land was allotted to the CGSCSCL without giving any notice to the petitioner or following due process, which is illegal, bad in law and is in violation of principles of natural justice. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel vehemently opposes the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that the petitioner has failed to show any document in her favour showing her possession over the said suit land, in fact, she is an encroacher upon the government land. It is true that the petitioner’s family is residing and cultivating the land for a long time, but it cannot grant them any legal right to possess the land. 5. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the 4 documents appended with the writ petition. 6. From perusal of the documents, it seems that perhaps the petitioner’s family is in occupation of the suit land in question, but the revenue record Annexure P/1 goes to show that the said land is recorded in the name of State Government and it is a government land in which even though the petitioner’s family is in possession by cultivating the land, then also they are not having any right and interest upon the said land. Even otherwise also, the petitioner is having an alternate remedy to approach the concerned Revenue Court as well as the Civil Court for the grievance as raised in this petition. Accordingly, the reliefs as claimed by the petitioner in this petition cannot be granted by invoking extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 7. As such, the petition sans merit, liable to be and is hereby dismissed in threshold. No order as to cost(s). Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Vishakha