1 / 3 2025:CGHC:28059 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3267 of 2025 1 - Baldev Diwan S/o Boti Aged About 50 Years R/o of Mundagaon, P.O. Mundagaon, District Bastar (C.G.) 2 - Ratan Diwan S/o Botiram Diwan Aged About 46 Years R/o of Patelpara, Mundagaon, P.O. Mundagaon, District Bastar (C.G.) 3 - Sukman Mourya S/o Rupdhar Mourya Aged About 55 Years R/o of Chalan Para, Mundagaon, PO Mundagaon, District Bastar (C.G.) 4 - Bhagirathi Diwan S/o Mangal Diwan Aged About 41 Years R/o of Bajarpara, Mundagaon, PO Mundagaon, District Bastar, (C.G.) ... Petitioners versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Panchayat And Rural Development Department Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Collector District -Bastar (C.G.) 3 - The Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Jagdalpur District- Bastar (C.G.) 4 - The Tahsildar Bhanpuri, District- Bastar (C.G.) 5 - Revenue Inspector Tahsil- Bhanpuri, District- Bastar (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Gaurav Singhal, Advocate For State : Ms. Upasana Mehta, Dy. GA ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2025.06.28 13:53:57 +0530 2 / 3 (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 26/06/2025 1. The instant petition has been filed being aggrieved with the demolition ride carried out by Respondent No.4 with respect to the construction made by the petitioners over the land bearing Khasra No.110, admeasuring 0.6400 hectares out of which 0.0066 hectares, which is a part of government land, was settled in favour of the petitioners and the petitioners are in possession of the said land for many decades. 2. Earlier on 22/10/2018 Respondent No.4 had issued eviction/demolition order to the petitioner and the petitioners were directed to appear in person on 26/10/2018 to submit their reply and the petitioners filed their reply and on 13/06/2025 and they have been directed to vacate the disputed land by 16/06/2025 and on 16/06/2025 The Tehsildar along with JCB came to the subject land to demolish the boundary wall constructed by the petitioners. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the proceeding is being carried out on pick and choose manner, therefore, it is prayed that the same may be stopped. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners and would submit that the instant petition may be dismissed. 3 / 3 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the documents with utmost circumspection. 6. From perusal of the documents I have found that Respondent No.4 had issued eviction demolition notice dated 22/10/2018 to the petitioner. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner is an encroacher to Government land bearing Khasra No.110, admeasuring 0.6400 hectares and out of 0.0066 hectares was in possession of the petitioner. Respondent No.4 has initiated proceedings under Section 248 of the C.G. Land Revenue Code, 1959 and passed the order against the petitioner and also awarded a fine/penalty 2000/- against the petitioner. Thereafter, Respondent No.4 has issued notice to the petitioner on 13/06/2025. 7. Considering the entire facts & circumstances of the case, the petitioner is granted liberty to file an appeal under Section 44 (1) of the C.G. Land Revenue Code, 1959 before the Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) within a period of 10 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Till the said appeal is filed for a period of 10 days, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner and after lapse of 10 days, the respondents shall be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law. 8. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands disposed of. SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE ashu