1 2025:CGHC:43264 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2149 of 2021 1 - Pankaj @ Sanjay Jyoti S/o Shri Munna Singh Jyoti, Aged About 35 Years R/o Sector-28, Satnami Mohalla, Nawagaon-1 (Nawagaon), Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Devnath Bharti S/o Shri Hagru Bharti, Aged About 48 Years R/o Mehar Para Nawagaon-1 (Nawagaon) Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration And Development, Atal Nagar, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Naya Raipur Development Authority, Through The Chief Executive Officer, Naya Raipur Development Authority Mantralay Near Mahanadi Bhawan Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Assistant Manager (Land), Naya Raipur Atal Nagar Development Authority, Atal Nagar Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Collector Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioners : Shri Jeet Ram Patel, Advocate. For Respondent/ State : Shri Shubham Bajpayee, P.L. For Respondents No.2 & 3 : Shri Anumeh Shrivastava, Advocate. NIRMALA RAO 2 Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 26.08.2025 1. The petitioners have filed this petition seeking the following reliefs:- “10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records pertaining to the case of the petitioners. 10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities not to Evict/ remove and oust the petitioners from their houses. 10.3 That, any other relief/order which may deem fit & just in the facts and circumstances of the case, including award of the cost of the petition may be given.” 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that respondent No. 3 issued an eviction warrant on 25.3.2021 to remove the possession from a part of Khasra No. 407, admeasuring 15.5 hectares, where a kachha house has been constructed. He would further submit that respondent No. 3 cannot exercise powers under Section 248 of the CG Land Revenue Code, as such powers are vested solely with the Tehsildar. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for respondents No. 2 and 3 would submit that a Notification was issued by the State of Chhattisgarh on 11.09.2007, whereby the Assistant Manager (Land) of Naya Raipur Development Authority was conferred with powers under Section 248 of CG Land Revenue Code. He would contend that proceedings were initiated, an order was passed against the petitioner and thereafter, an eviction notice was issued. 3 4. Learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State/respondents 1 & 4 would support the submissions made by counsel for respondents No.2 & 3. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents. 6. Taking into consideration the fact that respondent No. 3 exercised powers under Section 248 of the CG Land Revenue Code pursuant to the Notification issued by the State Government dated 11.09.2007, the contention made by Mr. Jeet Ram Patel is not sustainable. Accordingly, the petition fails and is hereby dismissed. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to prefer an appeal before the Appropriate Authority. 7. Mr. Anumeh Shrivastava is directed to serve a copy of the order passed under Section 248 of the CG Land Revenue Code to the petitioner within a period of 15 days. 8. As the interim order has been operating in favour of the petitioner since 7.6.2021, it shall remain in force for a further period of 45 days only. 9. If the petitioner prefers an appeal along with an application for the grant of stay, the Appellate Authority shall decide it within a period of 45 days. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nimmi