1 2025:CGHC:27589 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3173 of 2025 1 - Laxmi Prsad Rai S/o Shri Prem Narayan Rai Aged About 84 Years R/o Bharrid And Block Marwahi District Gaurella Pendra Marwahi (C.G) 2 - Shri Rajesh Rai S/o Shri Hewan Chandra Rai Aged About 52 Years R/o Bharrid And Block Marwahi District Gaurella Pendra Marwahi (C.G) --- Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management, Indravati Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur (C.G) 2 - Collector District Gaurella Pendra Marwahi (C.G) 3 - Sub Divisional Officer (R) Pendra Road, District Gaurella Pendra Marwahi (C.G) 4 - Tahsildar Pendra, District Gaurella Pendra Marwahi (C.G) ----Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Ali Asgar, Adv. For State : Ms. Nupur Trivedi, P.L. Hon’ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 25/06/2025 1. Counsel for the Petitioner prays for the following relief(s):- (i)To call for the record for the perusal of this Hon’ble Court. (ii) That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly issue a writ of Mandamus and issue directions to the respondent 2 authorities for conducting proper inquiry as to illegal mutation done in name of Hallu regarding land bearing Khasra No. 2354 areas 2.27 acres & Kharsa No. 2356 area 1.37 acres especially in the light of order dated 18.06.2015 passed by the SDO as early as possible. (iii) That any other relief which this court thinks fit in the interest of justice & equity. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petition is filed against the inaction on the part of the respondents authorities in not conducting proper inquiry despite the clear orders passed by SDO in the year 2016 and by under Secretary in the year 2024. The petitioners are the rightful owners who have been deprived from getting justice as influential persona have encroached and mutated the land. In this regard, the petitioner has made representation to the Collector dated 15.02.2025 (Annexure P/4) which is pending consideration. 3. Learned State Counsel submits that in view of the limited prayer made by the learned counsel for petitioner seeking direction to concerned authorities to consider the pending representation, she is having no objection to the limited prayer and it will be considered and released in accordance with law. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case instead of keeping this petition pending, I find it appropriate to dispose of the same at this stage directing the respondent-authorities to consider/decide the claim/representation of the petitioner as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law within a period of 6 months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 6. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Jyoti