1 / 3 2025:CGHC:42932 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4537 of 2025 1 - Shivshankar Beck S/o Sule Beck, Aged About 28 Years R/o Karhi Kachchar Belgahana, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 2 - Ramsay Beck S/o Sule Beck, Aged About 24 Years R/o Karhi Kachchar Belgahana, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Petitioners versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Revenue Department Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Kota, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 3 - The Collector, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 4 - Forest Range Officer, Forest Department Kota, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 5 - Tahsildar, Kota, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 6 - Assistant Commissioner, Adiwasi Vikas Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioners : Mr. Nikhil Wadhwani, Advocate appears on behalf of Mr. Awadh Tripathi, Advocate For State : Mr. Rishabh Bisen, PL (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 25/08/2025 ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2025.08.28 18:08:06 +0530 2 / 3 1. By way of the instant petition, the petitioners are challenging the action of the respondent authorities for not recording his name in the revenue records with respect to the land situated at Village Kekradih, Patwari Halka No.14, Tahsil Belgahana, District Bilaspur, C.G. bearing Khasra No.1113, area 1.600 Hectare. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the petitioners who belong to the ST Community were in possession of a piece of forest land since past 15-17 years and the said land was situated at Village Kekradih, Patwari Halka no. 14, Tahsil Belgahana District Bilaspur (C.G.) bearing Khasra no. 1113 area 1.600 Hectare and this land was allotted to the petitioner with due permission of the respondent authorities on 09.08.2022 and accordingly the Rin Pustika was prepared in the name of both the petitioners. He would next contend that the petitioners have been using the land for agriculture work and to protect their crops from the animals the petitioners wanted to build a wired fence upon the parameter of their land and for the same the petitioners filed an application for demarcation of their land before the forest range officer Kota on 08.02.2024 but there was no action taken by the Forest range Officer Kota. He would next contend that the petitioners on 15.01.2024 filed an application before the learned Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) to get the land allotted to them recorded in their name in the revenue records but there was no action taken by the authorities on the said application. Therefore, it is prayed that the respondent authorities may be directed to decide the applications filed by the 3 / 3 petitioners. 3. Learned counsel for the Respondents /State contended that the instant writ petition may be disposed of with a direction to the Respondents No.2 & 4 to decide the representation of the petitioner, subject to verification of the land in question. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the documents with utmost circumspection. 5. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the entire facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that Respondent No.2 shall decide the application of the petitioner dated 15/01/2024 (Annexure P/4) and Respondent No.4 shall decide the application for demarcation dated 03/03/2025 (Annexure P/5), subject to verification, expeditiously as early as possible in accordance with law. 6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the respondent authorities shall proceed in accordance with law while deciding the applications of the petitioner. 7. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands disposed of. SD/- SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE ashu