1 2025:CGHC:24865 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 3002 of 2025 Ratan Kushwaha S/o Late Ramdas Kushwaha Aged About 48 Years R/o Gram Panchayat - Seoni, Tahsil - Marwahi, District Gourella- Pendra-Marwahi Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management, Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Collector Gourella-Pendra-Marwahi, District Gourella-Pendra- Marwahi Chhattisgarh 3 - Sub Divisional Officer (R) Marwahi, District Gourella-Pendra- Marwahi Chhattisgarh 4 - Tahsildar Marwahi, District Gourella-Pendra-Marwahi Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Malay Shrivastava, Advocate For State/respondents : Mr. Praveen Das, Dy. AG Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 17/06/2025 VASANT KUMAR Digitally signed by VASANT KUMAR Date: 2025.06.17 16:36:48 +0530 2 1. Default overruled. 2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following relief(s) : “10.1. That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records of the respondent No.4. 10.2. That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the order dated 09.06.2025 passed in Revenue Case No.202506280600006/A-68/2025 issued by the respondent No.4 (ANNEXURE p/1); dispossession order dated 09.06.2025 issued by respondent No.4 bearing No. Nayab Tah./Reader/2025 (ANNEXURE p/2); order dated 13.06.2025 (wrongly mentioned as 03.06.2025) passed in Revenue Case No.202506280600006/A-68/2025 issued by respondent No.4(ANNEXURE p/3) and final dispossession order dated 13.06.2025 issued by respondent No.4 bearing No. Nayab Tah./Reader/2022 (ANNEXURE P/4). 10.3. Any other relief (s)/order (s)/direction (s) in favour of the petitioner, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice. 3 10.4. Cost of the petition.” 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the order issued by the respondent no.4 is arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction and contrary to the law applicable in the facts and circumstances of the present case. Respondent no.4 failed to see that on 30/06/2002 under the Indra Hareli-Saheli Yojana, 2001 the lease of the land has been given to the petitioner thus the petitioner is not an encroacher upon the land. He further submits that the respondent no.4 failed to see that for the land of the petitioner, the name of the petitioner has been selected under the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana Gramin for construction of the house and on 17/09/2024 an amount of Rs.40,000/- and on 13/05/2025 an amount of Rs.55,000/- has been sanction and paid to the petitioner and the petitioner has constructed a permanent house in the land. He further submits that the respondent no.4 with a premeditate mind has initiated the proceeding against the petitioner and an empty formality of proceeding has been done by the respondent no.4 without considering the facts that the lease has been granted to the petitioner. Respondent no.4 without giving proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and without consideration of the reply of the petitioner, the dispossession order has been passed by the respondent no.4. He also submits that the order passed by the respondent no.4 is a non-speaking order against the petitioner as no 4 reason has been assigned by the respondent no.4 for issuances of order of dispossession against the petitioner. Therefore, it is prayed that the order dated 09.06.2025 passed in Revenue Case No.202506280600006/A-68/2025 issued by the respondent No.4 (ANNEXURE P/1); dispossession order dated 09.06.2025 issued by respondent No.4 bearing No. Nayab Tah./Reader/2025 (ANNEXURE P/2); order dated 13.06.2025 passed in Revenue Case No.202506280600006/A-68/2025 issued by respondent No.4 (ANNEXURE P/3) and final dispossession order dated 13.06.2025 issued by respondent No.4 bearing No. Nayab Tah./Reader/2022 (ANNEXURE P/4) be quashed. 4. Learned counsel for the State-respondent opposed the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner and contended that since the order has been passed in a revenue proceeding, as such the challenge to it should have been made in an appeal under Section 44(1) of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents with utmost circumspection. 6. Considering facts of the case, submissions of counsel for the respective parties and on perusal of Annexure P/5, it transparent that it is not a lease deed and it is an agreement between the petitioner and the Government and as per Clause 1 & 2 of the agreement Annexure P/5 :- 5 (1) vuqca/k xzkfgrk@fgrxzkgh }kjk vuqlqph &1 esa of.kZr Hkwfe ij o`{kkjksi.k fd;k tkosxkA mäHkwfe ;k mlds fdlh Hkkx dk mi;ksx vU; iz;kstu ds fy, ugha djsxkkA (2) vuqca/k xzfgrk@fgrxzkgh dk Hkwwfe ij HkwfeLokeh gd ugha gksxkA 7. It is pertinent to mentioned here that respondent No.3/Tahsildar has issued the order dated 09.06.2025 as per provisions of Section 248 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959. It is also pertinent to mention here that Section 44 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code of 1959 Provides as under : “44. Appeal and appellate authorities. (1) Save where it has been otherwise provided, an appeal shall lie from every original order under this Code or the rules made thereunder- (a) if such order is passed by any Revenue Officer subordinate to the Sub-Divisional Officer, whether or not the officer passing the order is invested with the powers of the Collector-to the Sub-Divisional Officer; (b) if such order is passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, whether or not invested with the powers of the Collector-to the Collector; 6 (c) if such order is passed by any Revenue Officer subordinate to the Settlement Officer-to the Settlement Officer; (d) if such order is passed by any Revenue Officer in respect of whom a direction has been issued under sub-section (3) of Section 12 or sub-section (2) of Section 21-to such Revenue Officer as the State Government may direct; (e) if such order is passed by a Collector whether exercising the powers of Collector or Settlement Officer, during the currency of the term of settlement-to the [Board of Revenue] [Substituted by Act No. 17 of 2008]; (f) if such order is passed by a Settlement Officer, whether exercising the powers of Settlement Officer or the powers of a Collector in connection with any settlement operation unless otherwise expressly provided-to the Settlement Commissioner; (g) if such order is passed by the [Commissioner or the] [Inserted by Act No. 17 of 2008] Settlement Commissioner-to the Board. 7 (2) [Save as otherwise provided a second appeal shall lie against every order passed in first appeal under this Code or the rules made thereunder- (I) by the Sub-Divisional Officer or the Collector to the Commissioner; (ii) by the Settlement Officer to the Settlement Commissioner; (iii) by the Commissioner to the Board - (a) if the original order has in the first appeal been varied or reversed otherwise than in a matter of cost; or (b) on any of the following grounds and no other, namely, - (I) that the order is contrary to law or usage having the force of law; or (ii) that the order has failed to determine some material issue of law or usage having force of law; or (iii) that there has been a substantial error or defect in the procedure as prescribed by this Code, which 8 may have produced error or defect in the decision of the case upon merits. 8. In this case, it is an admitted fact that the Tahsildar/respondent No.4 has issued the notice to the petitioner under Section 248 of the Code, 1959. Therefore, there is an alternative remedy available to the petitioner under Section 44(1) of the Code, 1959. Thus, in view of the aforesaid aspect of the matter, I do not find any good ground to entertain this writ petition. However, petitioner is at liberty to approach before the concerned appellate authority within a period of 07 days from today with all relevant documents including agreement letter (Annexure P-5) of the suit land and in- turn the concerned appellate authority shall consider and decide the appeal as early as possible, as per relevant rules, regulations and law. During the above 07 days period, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner. 9. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the instant writ petition is disposed of. Certified copy as per Rules. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Vasant