1 2025:CGHC:35332 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3812 of 2025 1 - Gram Panchayat Kamti Through Its Up-Sarpanch, Bisouha Ram, S/o Somaru, Aged About 42 Years, R/o Village Kadma, Gram Panchayat Kamti, Janpad Panchayat Pandariya, District Kabirdham (C.G.). ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Revenue And Disaster Management Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Collector Kabirdham, District Kabirdham (C.G.) ----Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. C.Jayant K. Rao, Advocate For Respondent : Ms. Poorva Tiwari, P.L. Hon’ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 23/07/2025 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Gram Panchayat Kamti Passed resolution whereby the government land situated at village Kadma has been allotted by way of leased/patta to persons who are even not engaged in agricultural work and even not the resident of village Kadma, Gram Panchayat Kamti, Janpad Panchayat Pandariya. The petitioner who is the Up- Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat Kamti in the meeting of Gram Panchayat also passed resolution for cancellation of the patta granted to non-agriculturist and belonging to other villages. The Digitally signed by JYOTI JHA Date: 2025.07.24 12:01:27 +0530 2 petitioner also made objection before the collector to enquire the matter and cancelled the lease/patta granted along with the list of names, but ill date no action has been taken. Therefore, he prays that the objection (Annexure P/2) be decided in accordance with law. 2. Learned State counsel submits that in view of the limited prayer made by the learned counsel for petitioner seeking direction to respondent-authorities to decide the pending objection dated 19.09.2024 (Annexure P/2), she is having no objection to the limited prayer and if the objection of the petitioner is pending, it will be considered in accordance with law. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case instead of keeping this petition pending, I find it appropriate to dispose of the same at this stage directing the respondent-authorities to consider/decide the pending objection (Annexure P/2) in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible. 5. It is made clear that this Court has not observed anything on the merits of the case. 6. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Jyoti