1 2025:CGHC:31215 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 3462 of 2025 Durga Yadav S/o Lt. Shivdhari Yadav Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Satpata, Vishrampur, District Surajpur (C.G) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Revenue Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar Nawa Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Collector Surajpur, District Surajpur (C.G.) 3 - Sub-Divisional Officer Revenue, Surajpur, District Surajpur (C.G.) 4 - Nayab Tehsildar Vishrampur, District Surajpur (C.G.) 5 - Vijay Sharma S/o Jagannath Sharma Aged About 39 Years R/o Village Satpata, Tehsil Latori, District Surajpur (C.G.) 6 - Vinod Yadav S/o Shivdhari Yadav R/o Village Satpata, Tehsil Latori, District Surajpur (C.G.) 7 - Baliram Yadav S/o Shivdhari Yadav R/o Village Satpata, Tehsil Latori, District Surajpur (C.G.) 8 - Hansraj Yadav S/o Bigan Yadav R/o Village Satpata, Tehsil Latori, District Surajpur (C.G.) 9 - Satyanarayan Yadav S/o Bigan Yadav R/o Village Satpata, Tehsil Latori, District Surajpur (C.G.) ---- Respondents 2 For Petitioner : Mr. Sumit Singh Rathore & Ms. Manisha Yadav, Advocates For State : Ms. Poorva Tiwari, PL Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 08/07/2025 Heard. 1. The petitioner has been filed this writ petition on the following relief(s) : “10.1. That, this Hon'ble Court kindly be pleased to issue writ/order/direction and quash/set-aside the impugned order dated 05-02-2025 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Collector, District Surajpur (C.G) in Revenue Case No. 202409260100008/B-121/2023-24 (Vijay Sharma Vs Durga Yadav and Others) and the subsequent eviction notice dated 02-06-2025 (Annexure P-2) issued by the Nayab Tehsildar, Pilka Kshetra, Vishrampur, Tehsil Latori, District Surajpur (C.G), in the interest of justice. 10.2 Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper, may also be passed in favour of the petitioner together with cost of the petition.” 3 2. At the very outset, learned counsel for the State contended that as the alternative remedy is available to the petitioner, therefore, he may approach before the competent authority. 3. In view of the above, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the instant writ petition with liberty to avail the alternative remedy as available to the petitioner under the Rule/law. 4. Prayer is allowed and 10 days’ time is granted to the petitioner to file appropriate representation/application before the competent authority. 5. Accordingly, the instant petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. 6. Till then, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner with regard to subject land. Certified copy as per rules Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Vasant