1 2025:CGHC:33950 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3727 of 2025 1 - Santosh Singh Thakur S/o Late Kamal Singh Thakur, Aged About 51 Years R/o Lok Manya Tilak Ward, Kangoli, Tahsil And Police Station - Jagdalpur, District - Bastar (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Collector, Distt. Bastar (C.G.) 3 - Sub Divisional Officer, Jagdalpur, Distt. Bastar (C.G.) 4 - Tahsildar, Jagdalpur, Distt. Bastar (C.G.) 5 - Station House Officer, Police Station - Parpa/frazerpur, Distt. Bastar (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kishore Narayan, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Satish Gupta, G.A. Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge 2 Order on Board 18/07/2025 1. By way of the present petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs: “10.1 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus quashing impugned eviction notice dated 30.06.2025 (annexure P/1) in the interest of justice. 10.2 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass any other order considering the special facts and circumstances of this case.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is challenging the impugned notice dated 30.06.2025 whereby the Tahsildar Jagdalpur has passed the eviction order against the petitioner from the land occupied by him for the last 20 years. He would further submits that the Tahsildar Jagdalpur does not have power to initiate proceeding of removal of encroachment in the Municipal Corporation Area. 3. Learned State Counsel submits that there is an alternate remedy available to the petitioner under Section 44(1) of C.G. Land Revenue Code, 1959, therefore the present petition is not maintainable. 4. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 5. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of the respective counsel, there is an alternate remedy available to the petitioner under Section 44(1) of C.G. Land Revenue 3 Code, 1959, therefore, this Court does not find any good ground to entertain this petition. 6. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed with liberty to file an appeal under Section 44(1) of C.G. Land Revenue Code, 1959. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE Madhurima