1 / 4 2025:CGHC:34429 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3783 of 2025 1 - Nakul Yadav S/o Ram Prasad Yadav, Aged About 44 Years R/o Village - Daldhowa P.S. & Tahsil - Balrampur Distt. Balrampur - Ramanujganj (C.G.) 2 - Smt. Sangeeta Yadav, D/o Banshi Ahir W/o Nakul Yadav, Aged About 40 Years Village - Daldhowa P.S. & Tahsil - Balrampur Distt. Balrampur - Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Petitioners versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Forest Mahanadi Bhawan New Raipur Distt. - Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Secretary, Department Of Revenue Mahanadi Bhawan New Raipur Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 3 - The Collector, Balrampur Distt. - Balrampur Distt. - Balrampur Ramanujganj (C.G.) 4 - Divisional Forest Officer, Balrampur Distt. Balrampur - Ramanujganj (C.G.) 5 - The Game Ranger, Semarsot Century - Balrampur Distt. Balrampur - Ramanujganj (C.G.) 6 - Range Assistant, Forest Range - Balrampur Distt. Balrampur - Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. A.N. Pandey, Advocate For State : Ms. Upasana Mehta, Dy. GA ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2025.07.23 13:31:33 +0530 2 / 4 (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 21/07/2025 1. The instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed challenging the legality and validity of the order dated 13/06/2025 (Annexure P/1) issued by Respondent No.6 whereby the petitioner has been directed to produce the valid documents of the land in compartment No.RF424B, area 03.00 hectare situated at village Daldhowa, which was granted to petitioner No.2 on the allegation that the petitioner is illegally cultivating the aforesaid land. 2. By way of the instant petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:- 10.1 That, this Hon’ble court may kindly be pleased to set aside of the impugned order dated 13.6.2025 issued by the respondent no.6 ANNEXURE P/1. 10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to demarcate the land of the petitioners within stipulated period. 10.3 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased restrain the respondent authorities to not dispossess the petitioner from the subject land and not disturb the peaceful possession of the petitioner upon the subject land. 10.4 Any other relief or reliefs may also be granted to the petitioner which this Hon’ble court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner is in possession of the subject land since a long period and cultivating the said land 3 / 4 only on the portion which has been granted to the petitioner by way of patta and he has not encroached upon any other land, however, the respondent authorities have issued the impugned order and despite having filed the reply by the petitioner, the respondents have restrained the petitioner and directed not to cultivate the subject land without there being any demarcation or any reason. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and would submit that some overwriting exists in the entry of the revenue records, therefore, the instant petition deserves to be dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the documents with utmost circumspection. 6. Considering the submission of the petitioner that the petitioner has filed the documents which shows that there is Patta in favour of the petitioner for compartment No.RF424B, area 03.00 hectares and as per the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Patta has been granted to the petitioner by the Collector Surguja in Revenue Case No.10652/A-19(1)/2007-08 and the petitioner has also filed the documents in support of their possession which clearly reflect that there are documents in favour of the petitioners and they are the owner of the said property and their names have also been entered in the revenue records. In view of this the respondent authorities after due demarcation/identification of the property of the petitioner shall not disturb the peaceful possession of the petitioner’s 4 / 4 enjoyment of his right over the said property, subject to verification of Patta and Rin Pustika by the concerned authority and if it is found that the Patta is genuine, the respondent authority shall not disturb the peaceful possession on the subject property. 7. With the aforesaid direction/observation, the writ petition accordingly stands disposed of. SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE ashu