1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2028 of 2021 1 - Banvali Das S/o Lakhan Das Vaishnav Aged About 50 Years Occupation Labour, R/o Village Dhangaon, Thana Navagarh, Tahsil And District Bemetara Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - The Board Of Revenue Bilaspur Bench Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - The Commissioner Durg Division, Durg Chhattisgarh 3 - The Collector Bemetara District Bemetara Chhattisgarh 4 - The Sub- Divisional Officer (R) Bemetara, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh 5 - The Nayab Tahsildar Bemetara, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bharat Rajput, Advocate For respondents/State : Mr. Shubham Bajpayee, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 19. 08.2025 1. Heard. 2. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- “10.1 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set- aside/quash the impugned order dated 11.11.2020 passed by the Board of Revenue, and further may kindly be pleased to allow the case for settlement of the Govt. land and grant of lease in favour of the petitioner, in the interest of justice. 2 10.2 That any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including award of the cost of the petition may be given.” 3. The facts of the present case are that an application was moved by the petitioner on 27.11.2011 before the Collector along with proposal of Gram Panchayat for settlement of Government land bearing Survey No.606 admeasuring 0.94 hectare situated at Village Dhangaon, Tehsil and District Bemetara (C.G.) for agricultural purpose. The said application was rejected vide order dated 10.11.2014 by respondent No.3/Collector. Thereafter, the petitioner preferred an appeal before respondent No.2/Commissioner, Division Durg and it was dismissed vide order dated 10.08.2015. The Board of Revenue also dismissed the revision preferred by the petitioner vide order dated 11.11.2020 and against said order, this petition has been preferred. 4. Mr. Rajput, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is in possession of the property in question since 1998 and therefore, an application was moved to grant lease of the property in favour of the petitioner. He would further submit that the petitioner has no other land available for cultivation, therefore, the Board of Revenue and other revenue authorities ought to have allowed the application moved by the petitioner. He would pray to set aside the order passed by the Board of Revenue dated 11.11.2020. 5. On the other hand, Mr. Bajpayee, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State, would oppose the submissions made by Mr. Rajput. He would submit that as the land in question bearing Survey No.606 is a Government land and reserved as grass land, therefore, the application moved by the petitioner was rejected by the Collector and same has been affirmed by the Commissioner and the Board of Revenue. He would further submit that 3 there is concurrent finding of fact and thus, the present petition deserves to be dismissed. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents placed on the record. 7. Considering the fact that the subject property bearing Survey No.606 admeasuring 0.94 hectare situated at Village Dhangaon, Tehsil and District Bemetara (C.G.) is a Government land and reserved for grass land, the revenue authorities rightly rejected the application moved by the petitioner for grant of lease. I do not find any good ground to interfere with the findings recorded by the Revenue Courts including the Board of Revenue. 8. Consequently, this petition fails and is hereby dismissed at the admission stage. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Rekha