1 / 3 2025:CGHC:46728 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4878 of 2025 Smt. Rameshwari Shrivas W/o Shri Manharan Lal Shrivas Aged About 45 Years R/o Ward No. 2, Abdul Kalam Nagar, Sakri, P.S. Sakri, Tahsil Sakri, Distt. Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - The State of Chhattisgarh Department of Revenue, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, P.O. And P.S. Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Collector Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - The Tahsildar Sakri, Distt. Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 4 - The Commandant 2nd Battalion, Chhattisgarh Arms Force, Sakri, Distt. Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. V.K. Pandey, Advocate For State : Mr. Anurag Tripathi, PL (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 12/09/2025 1. The present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 20/05/2025 passed by Respondent No.3 whereby the application moved by the petitioner under Section 131 of the CGLRC has been ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2025.09.15 18:47:47 +0530 2 / 3 dismissed. 2. The brief facts of the case are that earlier the petitioner has filed a writ petition bearing WPC No.3404 of 2024 against the action of Respondent No.4 therein closing the road (public path) in front of the house of the petitioner which was connected with the National Highway, by constructing a boundary wall. The said writ petition was disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioner to submit application before appropriate authority and the said authority was directed to decide the same expeditiously. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that now the respondent authorities have dismissed the application of the petitioner filed under Section 131 of the C.G. Land Revenue Code, 1959. Hence this petition. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel would submit that the instant writ petition is not maintainable on account of availability of alternative remedy of filing an appeal under Section 135 of the C.G. Land Revenue Code, 1959. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the documents with utmost circumspection. 6. In view of the above, the instant petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file the appropriate application before the concerned authority. 3 / 3 7. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the respondent authorities shall be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law. SD/- SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE ashu