1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 328 of 2021 1 - Jaishri Sahu W/o. Shri Rameshwar Prasad Sahu Aged About 39 Years R/o. Gitanjali City, Phase-2, Bahtarai Road, Bilaspur, Tehsil And District - Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh), District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Collector Bilaspur, Revenue And Civil District- Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh), District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) Bilaspur, Revenue And Civil District- Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh), District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Tehsildar Bilaspur, Revenue And Civil District- Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh), District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Additional Tehsildar Bilaspur Revenue And Civil District- Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh), District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 5 - Smt. Usha Sahu W/o. Shri S.R. Sahu Aged About 57 Years R/o. Nehru Nagar, Ameri Road, Bilaspur, Tehsil And District- Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh), District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 6 - Narayan Prasad Gabel Presently Posted As Tehsildar Bilaspur, (The Then Posted As Additional Tehsildar Bilaspur) Tehsil And District- Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh), District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Rishi Sahu, Advocate For State : Ms. Shailja Shukla, Dy.G.A. For respondent No.5 : Mr. Sourabh Sahu, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 05.08.2025 REKHA SINGH -2- 1. The petitioner has filed this petition against the interim order passed by the Additional Tahsildar, Bilaspur dated 10.07.2020 in a proceeding initiated under Section 250 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 (for short ‘the Act of 1959’). 2. Mr. Sahu, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the Additional Tahsildar passed an interim order though power is not vested with it to pass any interim order. He would further submit that an application under Section 250 of the Code of 1959 was moved by respondent No.5 on 30.06.2020 and the interim order was passed and construction which was being raised by the petitioner was stayed by the Additional Tahsildar vide order dated 10.07.2020. He would pray to quash the order dated 10.07.2020 being arbitrary and without jurisdiction. 3. On the other hand, learned counsels appearing for the respondents would oppose. They would submit that the order impugned is appealable one. They would also submit that the authority, who has power to decide the case finally may also pass an interim order. They would contend that the petition deserves to be dismissed. 4. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents placed on record. 5. The Tahsildar while exercising power under Section 250 of the 3 Code of 1959 may pass order for removal of encroachment and at the same time, an interim order can also be passed considering the nature and urgency involved in the case. 6. In the present case, an application under Section 250 of the Code of 1959 was moved by respondent No.5 and an interim order was passed by the Additional Tahsildar on 10.07.2020. 7. Further, the order passed by the Additional Tahsildar is appealable according to the provisions of Section 44 of the Code of 1959. 8. Taking into consideration the above-discussed facts, in my opinion, this petition is not maintainable and accordingly, dismissed. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to avail remedy available under the law. 9. Certified copy of the impugned order be returned after retaining its xerox copy. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Rekha