1 2025:CGHC:3022 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 324 of 2025 1 - Vaidh Ramesh Chandra Vashishth S/o Late Shiv Kumar Aged About 78 Years R/o Ward No. 14 Baisagarpara Baikunthpur Tehsil And District Korea Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Of Revenue And Disaster Management, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Collector Koriya Baikunthpur, District Koriya Chhattisgarh. 3 - Sub Divisional OfÏcer (R) Baikunthpur, District Koriya Chhattisgarh. 4 - Dinesh Gupta S/o Babu Lal Gupta Aged About 55 Years R/o Ward No. 14, Baisagarpara Baikunthpur, Teh. And Distt. Korea Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from CIS) For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Chetna Sharma, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Praveen Das, Dy. Advocate General. SHOAIB ANWAR Digitally signed by SHOAIB ANWAR Date: 2025.01.17 23:53:38 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Order on Board 17.01.2025 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner is questioning the order dated 09.01.2025 passed by the SDO (R), by which the interim order dated 05.12.2024 passed by the SDO has been recalled on the ground that the Tehsildar submitted a report dated 03.01.2025 before the SDO (R). 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though there was an interim order of the SDO (R), the same cannot be vacated or recalled without hearing the party who has approached the SDO and the complaint made by the petitioner the said proceeding was drawn, hence the petitioner is required to be heard before recalling the interim order dated 05.12.2024. 3. Learned State counsel place the report dated 03.01.2025 which has been provided by the Tehsildar to the SDO (R) on the basis of the spot inspection made by the Revenue Inspector, where it was found that there is a dispute of 2 adjacent land by 2 neighbour. The Tehsildar submitted in its report very clearly that the petitioner and the private respondents are 2 neighbour and there is a dispute over the drainage between the two plots of the petitioner and the private respondent. The said report placed by the learned counsel for the State is taken into record and a copy of the same has been provided to the petitioner’s counsel. 3 4. If the grievance remains with the petitioner that the Stay granted on 05.12.2024 has been vacated in his absence, it is directed that the petitioner may approach the SDO (R) by controverting the report placed by the Tehsildar before the SDO and the SDO is directed to consider the reply, if any, submitted which will be submitted by the petitioner before him in accordance with law and take a decision about the order dated 09.01.2025 by reconsidering the case and grievance of the petitioner on the basis of the reply submitted by the petitioner. 5. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed off. Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Shoaib