1 2025:CGHC:21207 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2368 of 2025 1 - Tikelal Chouhan S/o Shri Padman Chouhan Aged About 50 Years Occupation- Kotwar (Village- Gopalpur), R/o Village- Khaikhuta, Tehsil- Pithora, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Collector Mahasamund District- Mahasamund (C.G.) 3 - Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Pithora District- Mahasamund (C.G.) 4 - Tehsildar Pithora District- Mahasamund (C.G.) 5 - Gram Panchayat Gopalpur Through Its Secretary, Village- Gopalpur, Tehsil- Pithora, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Surfaraj Khan, Advocate For State : Mr. Shreyansh Mehta, Panel Lawyer SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 08/05/2025 1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs :- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a Suitable Writ (s), Order (s), Direction (S), by commanding the office of Tehsildar Pithora (respondent no. 4 herein) for taking necessary decision on the representation dated 18.03.2024 (Annexure P-4) and memorandum dated 31.12.2024 (Annexure P-6), within a time frame. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call the entire records from the court below for its kind perusal. Digitally signed by SHAYNA KADRI 2 10.3 Any other relief, which may be suitable in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be granted.” 2. Facts of the case, in a nutshell, are that the petitioner is working as a Kotwar of Gram Panchayat Gopalpur, Tehsil Pithora, District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh. He was appointed to the said post on 07.08.2012. A complaint was later filed by the Gram Panchayat against the petitioner, alleging frequent absence from duty and requesting his replacement. In response, the Tehsildar, Pithora initiated revenue case no. 202208120800041/B-121/2021-22 and passed a suspension order against the petitioner on 21.08.2023. Subsequently, the said revenue proceeding was dismissed for want of prosecution by the Court of Tehsildar on 02.05.2024. Following this, the petitioner submitted an application on 18.03.2024 before the Tehsildar Pithora seeking reinstatement. He also submitted a representation to the Sub- Divisional Officer (Revenue), Pithora on 13.12.2024 requesting reinstatement and payment of remuneration. Acting upon this, the SDO (Revenue) issued a memorandum dated 31.12.2024 to the Tehsildar, directing him to take appropriate decision on the reinstatement of the petitioner and remuneration. However, despite the dismissal of the proceedings and the directive from the SDO, no decision has yet been taken by the office of the Tehsildar Pithora. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the continued inaction on the part of the respondent authorities, particularly the Tehsildar Pithora is arbitrary, illegal, and contrary to the principles of natural justice. He argues that after the dismissal of the revenue proceeding on 02.05.2024 by the Tehsildar, there remains no legal impediment to the reinstatement of the petitioner on the post of Kotwar. Despite this, and despite having filed representations on 18.03.2024 and 3 13.12.2024 (Annexures P-4 and P-5 respectively), no decision has been taken. The memorandum of SDO dated 31.12.2024 (Annexure P-6) clearly instructs the Tehsildar to take necessary action regarding reinstatement and remuneration, but the failure of the Tahsildar to act amounts to administrative apathy and exceeds the bounds of his lawful authority. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is praying for limited relief seeking a direction to the respondent No. 3 / Tahsildar, Pithora, Distt. - Mahasamund (C.G.) to take decision on the pending representation submitted by petitioner on 18.03.2024 and 13.12.2024 within some stipulated period in accordance with law. 4. Learned State counsel submits that in view of the limited prayer made by learned counsel for petitioners seeking a direction to the concerned respondents to decide the representation, he is having no objection. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties and also perused the documents annexed along with the petition. 6. In view of the above submissions and considering the limited nature of the relief sought, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No. 3 / Tahsildar, Pithora, Distt. - Mahasamund (C.G.) to consider and decide the representations submitted by the petitioner on 18.03.2024 and 13.12.2024 strictly in accordance with law and on their own merits, expeditiously, preferably within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 7. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. 8. With this observation and direction, this petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Shayna JUDGE