1 2025:CGHC:33943 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3413 of 2025 Raju Kandra S/o Bajaru Kandra Aged About 42 Years R/o Village Rampur, Patwari Halka No. 22, Tahsil Tundra, District Balodabazar- Bhatapara (Chhattisgarh) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh The Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Mahanadi Bhawan New Mantralaya Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Collector/ Upper Collector Balodabazar- Bhatapara District Balodabazar- Bhatapara Chhattisgarh 3 - Tahsildar Tahsil Tundra, District Balodabazar- Bhatapara Chhattisgarh 4 - Revenue Inspector Gidhouri, Tahsil Tundra, District Balodabazar- Bhatapara Chhattisgarh 5 - Smt. Santoshi W/o Lat Bundram Ganda R/o Village Rampur, Tahsil Tundra, District Balodabazar- Bhatapara Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. K.P. Sahu, Advocate For State/respondents : Mrs. Akanksha Verma Dabadhker, Panel lawyer Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 18.07.2025 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner is seeking for the following reliefs:- “a. That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the impugned notice dated 26.05.2025 and proceeding (Annexure P/1), in the interest of justice. b. That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner and to demark the subject land and to delete the name of the petitioner from the ALFIZA BAIG Digitally signed by ALFIZA BAIG Date: 2025.07.18 16:08:31 +0530 2 proceeding of the impugned notice within stipulated time, in the interest of justice. c. Any other relief, which the Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be granted in favor of the petitioner.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent no. 2 vide order dated 29.01.2024 has directed to revenue authorities to demark the subject land Khasra No. 112/3, 155/2 area 0.809 hectare, 1.327 hectare. That, despite of clear direction order dated 29.01.2024, the revenue officer has not complied the order of demarcation of the subject land, and unnecessary issued notice in the name of the petitioner’s land which is completely illegal erroneous and contrary to the law. He submits that the petitioner moved a representation before the respondent authorities for seeking to demark the subject land and to delete the name of the petitioner from the proceeding of the impugned notice, but the same has not been taken any action by the respondent authorities till today, due to this, the petitioner and his family members are being unnecessarily and mentally harassing without any fault on the part of the petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for the State raised submits that there is no objection if the direction of deciding the pending representation be made. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties at length and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 5. After care perusal of the record available, it is clear that the petitioner has made representation to the respondent authorities (Annexure P/5) on 21.03.2025, however, till date no reply or decision has been taken by the concerned respondent authorities on the representation made by the petitioner. Therefore, this Court directs the concerned respondent no. 3/Tehsildar to decide the representation (Annexure P/5) made by the petitioner expeditiously, if not already decided. 6. With the aforesaid direction, the instant petition stands disposed of. sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) alfiza JUDGE