1 2025:CGHC:37489 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4014 of 2025 Smt. Anupama Chaubey W/o Aashish Kumar Chaubey Aged About 45 Years R/o- Ramanujganj Ward No. 05, P/s And Tahasil Ramanujganj, Distt.- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Revenue And Disaster Management, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Collector Distt.- Balrampur-Ramaunjganj (C.G.) 3 - The Additional Collector Balrampur (Wrongly Mention Ramanujganj) Distt.- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) 4 - The Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) Cum Nazul Officer Ramanujganj, Distt.- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) 5 - The Chief Municipal Officer Nagar Panchayat Ramanujganj, Distt.- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) VASANT KUMAR Digitally signed by VASANT KUMAR Date: 2025.08.01 12:28:42 +0530 2 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner : Mr. Rahul Mishra, Advocate For Respondent-State : Ms. Poorva Tiwari, PL --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 31.07.2025 1. The present petition is filed by the petitioners with following relief(s): “10.1. A writ and/or an order in the nature of appropriate writ do issue calling the records from the respondent authorities concerned pertaining to case of the petitioner for perusal of this Hon'ble Court, if thinks fit in the facts & circumstances of case. 10.2 A writ and/or an order in the nature of appropriate writ do issue restraining the respondents from the recovery of any loss of paddy due delay in lifting of paddy by the respondents itself and for which loss of moisture the said loss must be counted in driage and further pleased to direct the respondents to consider and decide the letter dated 12.11.2024, in the facts and circumstances. 10.3 A writ and/or an order in the nature of appropriate writ do issue restraining the respondents from adopting the unlawful act for the recovery of the loss which is due to the respondents own fault. 10.4 A writ and/or an order in the nature of appropriate writ do issue directing the respondent to follow the policy framed in this regard for the resolution of the dispute. 10.5 Cost of the proceedings. 3 10.6 Any other writs and directions that may be deemed fit and just in the facts & circumstances of case.” 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the impugned order dated 05.09.2024 & 22.10.2024 (Annexure P/1) passed by respondents no. 3 & 4 in Revenue Case No. 202012270900082/A- 20(1)/2020-21 whereby the respondents no. 3 & 4 without having jurisdiction and without giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner the application filed by petitioner for allotment of nazul land bearing khasra no. 70/1343/1 rakba 0.03 decimal (123 sq. meter = 1350 sqft) has been rejected on the ground that, the order dated 11.09.2019 issued by the State Government has been rejected vide letter dated 23.07.2024 by respondent no. 1. It is respectfully submitted that, there are rules provided for allotment of Nazul land under Chapter IV(1) Clause 13, 15 & 17 of Revenue Book Circular and order dated 11.09.2019, the District Collector is competent authority whereas the respondents no.3 & 4, who has passed the impugned order against the petitioner without jurisdiction. 3. Learned State counsel opposed the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that there is an alternate remedy available to the petitioner. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner at length and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case instead of keeping 4 this petition pending, I find it appropriate to dispose of the same at this stage directing the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the competent authority and in turn the respondent authorities are directed to consider/decide the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law. Since, the petitioner is in possession of the land in question and he has already deposited the settlement amount of Rs. 1,76,542/- before the competent authority, therefore, till the representation of the petitioner is decided, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner. 6. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE Vasant