1 / 5 2025:CGHC:34430 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3786 of 2025 Ashima Narwal W/o Sumit Dalal Aged About 25 Years R/o House No. 845, Sector 14, Faridabad, District Faridabad, Haryana. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department of Revenue And Disaster Management, Mantralaya, Mahandi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur C.G. 2 - The Collector, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon C.G. 3 - The Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Tahsil- Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon C.G. 4 - The Deputy Registrar, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon C.G. 5 - The District Registrar, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon C.G. 6 - The Nayab Tahsildar, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon C.G. 7 - The Patwari P.H.N. 20, Village- Khairjhiti, Tehsil- Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon C.G. ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Pushkar Sinha, Advocate For Respondents/State : Mr. Rishab Bisen, PL (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 21/07/2025 1. The instant writ petition has been filed against the action of the ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2025.07.24 11:01:00 +0530 2 / 5 respondent authorities for not mutating the land of the petitioner in the name of the petitioner land bearing Khasra No.1040 new and 668 old, P.H. No.14, about 200 m inside from Rajnandgaon Tilai- Ghumka main road, about 12.5 KM from Rajnandgaon Town, Village Khirjhiti, Tehsil and District Rajnandgaon, C.G. 2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner has purchased for a sum of Rs. 1,22,00,000/- (Rs. One Crore Twenty Two Lacs Only) the immovable property agricultural land bearing Khasra No. 1040 new and 668 old, P.H No. 14, about 200 m inside from Rajnandgaon Tilai- Ghumka main road, about 12.5 Km from Rajnandgaon Town, Village- Khirjhiti, Tehsil and District- Rajnandgaon, C.G, having land area 19.877 hectare (49.11 acres) mortgaged property at a sale held by E-auction on 26.06.2019 in execution of recovery certificate No. 190/2018 in OA No. 223/2013 drawn up by the Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal-II, New Delhi for recovery of arrears from RKSK Overseas Pvt. Ltd. and thereafter petitioner being the successful bidder in auction sale was confirmed in favour of the petitioner and in consequent thereto a sale certificate dated 29.05.2020 was issued in favour of the petitioner by Recovery Officer-II, DRT-II, Delhi. Thereafter on the basis of sale certificate dated 29.05.2020 petitioner approached before Registrar office Rajnandgaon for registration of aforementioned land in name of petitioner and also submitted E-Stamp duty amounting to Rs. 7,62,500/- but later on it came to the knowledge of petitioner that the sale certificatedoes not come underthe essential documents and need 3 / 5 not to be registration of the said documents so the petitioner filed an application before Respondent no. 5 and prayed for return of original Sale Certificate along with stamp duty amounting to Rs. 7,62,500/-. Thereafter petitioner made an application for mutation of the aforesaid land in revenue records before Respondent no. 6 and the respondent no. 6 passed the order dated 22/01/2022 and thereby observed that the sale certificate in which amount is more than hundred rupees it needs registration and if the purchaser not registered the said documents, then purchaser doesn't hold the title and further dismissed the mutation application of petitioner. Petitioner being aggrieved to the order passed by Respondent No. 6 preferred an appeal before Respondent No. 3 and vide order dated 14.05.2022 Respondent No. 3 allowed the appeal and set aside the order dated 28.01.2022 passed by Respondent No. 6 and given the direction to Respondent No. 6 to mutate the land in favour of petitioner in the revenue records. In pursuant to order dated 14.05.2022, the Respondent No. 6 issued letter dated 06.06.2022 to Halka Patwari for the compliance of order passed by Respondent no. 3 for mutation of land in the name of petitioner in the revenue records but the same has not been complied by the authority and further Respondent no. 6 made a correspondence to Respondent No. 3 vide letter dated 24.08.2022 and stated that this Hon'ble High Court in W.P (Απ. 227) No. 6665/2008 vide order dated 28/11/2008 as an interim relief directed for maintain the status quo status, and for that mutation proceedings could not be completed due to the 4 / 5 order passed by this Hon'ble Court, even though the above said writ petition has already been disposed by this Hon'ble Court vide order dated 15.04.2013 and there is no such any interim order is operative at present but till date respondent authority after considerable lapse of time not taken any action for the mutation of the above said land in favour of petitioner and sit over the matter since long and thereby petitioner has been deprived from her legal right, which is unjust, illegal, and unconstitutional and requires indulgence of this Hon'ble Court. Hence this petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that though there is specific direction of the State Government that the pending cases of mutation, demarcation of land and diversion proceedings shall be decided immediately failing which the disciplinary action would be taken against the erring officers and the Respondent No.3 has already directed the respondent No.6 to mutate the subject property in favour of the petitioner in the land revenue records but the Respondent No.6 deliberately for the one reason or the other has not complied the order passed by Respondent No.3. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the documents with utmost circumspection. 6. On perusal of the record it reveals that on 29th of May, 2020 sale 5 / 5 certificate was issued by the Recovery Officer-II, DRT-II, Delhi and on 14/05/2022 Respondent No.3 allowed the appeal filed by the petitioner and directed Respondent No.6 to mutate the land in favour of the petitioner in the land revenue record, however, the Tehsildar has passed the order that against the order of Board of Revenue dated 30th of September, 2008 and on 11/11/2008 in WP 227 No.6665/2008 on 28/11/2008 an interim relief was granted by this Court. On perusal of order dated 15/04/2013 passed in WP 227 No.6666, 6665 & 7172 of 2008 it shows that these writ petitions have have already been decided by this Court, therefore, the learned Naib Tehsildar wrongly mentioned the fact that the interim relief is still operated. 7. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, Respondent No.6 is directed to decide the case of the mutation proceedings of the petitioner with the regard to the subject land within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 8. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands disposed of. SD/- SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE ashu