Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 28344 (CHH)

JAGRESH SINGH v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPC/2982/2025 · 2025-06-15

Shri Arvind Kumar Verma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:24522 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2982 of 2025 1 - Jagresh Singh S/o Krishna Singh Aged About 47 Years By Caste - Kshatriya, R/o Village- Bhedia, Tahsil - Pratappur, Distt.- Surajpur (C.G.) 2 - Sanjay Singh S/o Krishna Singh Aged About 40 Years By Caste - Kshatriya, R/o Village- Bhedia, Tahsil - Pratappur, Distt.- Surajpur (C.G.) 3 - Ajay Singh S/o Krishna Singh Aged About 44 Years By Caste - Kshatriya, R/o Village- Bhedia, Tahsil - Pratappur, Distt.- Surajpur (C.G.) --- Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Collector Surajpur, Distt.- Surajpur (C.G.) 2 - Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Pratappur, Distt.- Surajpur (C.G.) 3 - Nayab Tahsildar Sub Tahsil - Dandkarwan, Tahsil - Pratappur, Distt.- Surajpur (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) 2 For Petitioner(s) : Shri Sanjay Pathak, Advocate For Respondent/State : Shri Praveen Das, Dy.AG (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 16/06/2025 By way of the instant petition, the petitioners have challenged the impugned notice dated 10.06.2025 issued by the respondent No.3 for demolishing the houses of the petitioners which has been constructed on the government land. 2. Counsel for the petitioners submits that he may be permitted to withdraw this petition with liberty to pursue alternative remedy available under the law. 3. Learned counsel for the State submits that the petitioners No.1 & 3 have file appeal under Section 44 (1) of the Land Revenue Code before the SDO (Revenue) against the order passed by the Tahsildar under Section 248 of the Land Revenue Code,1959. He further contended that the petitioner No.2 has filed revision against the order passed by the SDO under Section 44 (1) of the Land Revenue Code. He therefore submits that the petitioners can avail the alternative remedy available to them under the law. 4. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioners to pursue the alternative remedy available to them under the law. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge SUGUNA DUBEY Digitally signed by SUGUNA DUBEY Date: 2025.06.18 11:18:38 +0530