-1- 2025:CGHC:14052 NAFR HIGH COURT of CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3257 of 2019 Dakeshwar Kumar Soni S/o Shri Bhushan Lal Soni Aged About 42 Years R/o Subhash Ward, Kanker, District- Kanker, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Revenue Department Mantralaya, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Collector Kanker, Uttar Bastar Kanker, District- Kanker, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Chief Municipal officer Municipal Council Kanker, District- Kanker, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Nazul officer Uttar Bastar Kanker, District- Kanker, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Executive Engineer/ Sub Divisional officer Highway 30, Jagdalpur (Bastar), Kanker, District- Kanker, Chhattisgarh. 6 - Hemant Dewangan Sub Engineer, Municipal Council, Kanker, District- Kanker, Chhattisgarh. 7 - Nischay Batt Revenue Inspector, Nazul Department, Kanker, District- Kanker, Chhattisgarh. 8 - Om Prakash Ahirwar Contractor, Om Construction, Uday Nagar, Kanker, District- Kanker, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) (Cause Title is taken from Case Information System) Digitally signed by NADIM MOHLE -2- For Petitioner : Mr. Pushpendra Kumar Patel, Advocate For State : Mr. Prateek Tiwari, Panel Lawyer For Respondent No.3 : Ms. Shrijeeta Kesharwani, Advocate, holding the brief of Mr. Rajesh Kumar Kesharwani, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 24.03.2025 1) The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief: “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court, may kindly call for the entire record in relates to the case of the petitioner. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court, may kindly be pleased to issued a writ / or writs / order / or orders / to direct the concern respondent's authorities, to decide the representations (Annexure P/5), made by the petitioner and further be direct to the respondent no. 3, to not construct the commercial complex in the disputed land in question and further be take the necessary action against the responsible authorities. 10.3 That, any other relief, this Hon'ble Court, deem fit and proper may also kindly be granted to the petitioner, in the interest of justice.” 2) Mr. Patel, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would fairly submit that the respondent No.3 raised a construction over Nazul Land, bearing sheet No.03A, Plot No.4, area 432 sq. mtr. without obtaining prior -3- permission from Nazul Officer or Collector. He would contend that the Government Land cannot be used by the respondent No.3 for commercial purpose. He would further submit that a representation was made by the petitioner before the Collector / Nazul Officer, on 23.03.2019, but till date no action has been taken. 3) On the other hand, counsel appearing for the respondents would oppose the submission made by Mr. Patel. 4) Taking into consideration the limited grievance of the petitioner, this petition is hereby disposed of at admission stage directing the Collector, Kanker/Nazul Officer to decide the pending representation of the petitioner dated 23.03.2019 in an objective manner, strictly in accordance with law preferably within a period of 120 days. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nadim