1 2025:CGHC:41384 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4381 of 2025 Kunti Bai Suryawanshi W/o Late Motilal Suryawanshi Aged About 62 Years R/o Village Nagpura Tehsil And District - Durg Chhattisgarh (Correct Name) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Revenue And Disaster Management Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Capital Complex, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - District Collector District Durg Chhattisgarh 3 - The Sub Divisional Officer (R) Durg, District Durg Chhattisgarh 4 - Naib Tehsildar Tehsil - Durg, District Durg Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner : Mr. Aditya Kumar Mishra, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Rishabh Bisen, PL --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 18.08.2025 1. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally. 2. The instant petition has been filed by the petitioner on the following VASANT KUMAR Digitally signed by VASANT KUMAR Date: 2025.08.19 10:28:39 +0530 2 prayer : “10.1. Issue an appropriate writ, order, or direction in the nature of Mandamus or any other suitable writ, declaring that the petitioner is the lawful Bhumiswami and owner in possession of the land bearing Khasra No. 1990/1, admeasuring 1.60 hectares, situated in Village Nagpura, Tahsil & District Durg, Chhattisgarh, in terms of the final and binding order dated 12.06.2008 passed by the Sub- Divisional Officer (Revenue), Durg, as corrected by order dated 23.07.2008; 10.2. Quash and set aside the show cause/stay notice dated 22.07.2025 issued by the Naib Tehsildar, Durg, as being without jurisdiction, arbitrary, and contrary to the binding adjudication of the petitioner's title and possession. 10.3. Restrain the respondents, their officers, agents, and anyone claiming through them, from in any manner interfering with the petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the aforesaid land, including the construction of her residential house thereon, except in accordance with due process of law. 10.4. Direct the respondents to act strictly in accordance with the orders passed by the competent revenue authority in favour of the petitioner and to respect the entries in the revenue records recording the petitioner's Bhumiswami rights. 10.5. Pass such other and further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contented that the petitioner presently serving as Kotwar of Village Nagpura, District Durg, Chhattisgarh, whose family has been holding the said post hereditarily since 1929. As part of the then customary arrangement prior to 1950, the petitioner's forefathers were granted certain parcels of land in lieu of their services 3 as Kotwars. Upon the abolition of proprietary rights under the Abolition of Proprietary Rights (Estates, Mahals, Alienated Lands) Act, 1950, the petitioner's family, being in possession of the said land, became entitled to be recorded as Bhumiswamis by operation of law. This entitlement the Sub-was duly recognized by the competent revenue authority vide order dated 12.06.2008 in Divisional Officer (Revenue), Durg Revenue Case No. 96A/74, as corrected by order dated 23.07.2008. The said orders have attained finality and have never been challenged. The petitioner's name is duly recorded in the B-1 Khasra and Rin Pustika as Bhumiswami. In 2013, the Gram Panchayat, Nagpura, passed a resolution granting permission to the petitioner to construct a residential house over the said land. Acting on this, the petitioner began construction after dismantling an old structure. However, during the construction, the petitioner was served with a Show Cause/Stay Notice dated 22.07.2025 by the Naib Tehsildar, Durg, alleging unauthorized construction, ignoring the petitioner's clear title and lawful possession. The petitioner promptly filed a detailed reply dated 29.07.2025 enclosing all relevant documents. Despite this, no speaking order has been passed, and the respondents are now threatening to demolish the petitioner's under-construction house without following due process. The respondents' actions are wholly arbitrary, mala fide, and contrary to the binding orders of the competent authority, the entries in the revenue records, and settled legal principles. The petitioner, therefore, approaches this Court seeking protection of her lawful rights, quashing of the impugned notice, and restraint against coercive action without due 4 process of law. Hence, this petition. 4. Learned State counsel contended that there is no demolition order has been passed against the petitioner, only show cause/stay notice dated 22.07.2025 has been issued by the Naib Tehsildar, Durg to the petitioner. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and submission made by learned counsel for the parties, particularly considering that there is no order of demolition has been passed by respondent No.4 - Naib Tahsildar, Tahsil & District Durg (C.G.) against the petitioner, therefore, petitioner is directed to participate in the proceedings initiated by respondent No.4- Naib Tahsildar, Tahsil & District Durg (C.G.). Respondent No.4 shall provide sufficient opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and thereafter passed the order in accordance with rules, regulations & law. 7. Meanwhile, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner. 8. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the instant petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE Vasant