1 2025:CGHC:46730 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4873 of 2025 • Surajbal S/o Late Sadhu Aged About 69 Years Caste Ghasiya R/o Chichhore Umariya Tahsil Pussore District Raigarh C.G ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Collector Raigarh Chhattisgarh 2 - Sub Divisional Officer Raigarh, Distt. Raigarh C.G. 3 - Tahsildar Pussore District Raigarh C.G 4 -Revenue Inspector Pussore District Raigarh C.G 5 - Sarpanch Village Panchayat Chichhore Umariya Tahsil Pussore District Raigarh, C.G. 6 - Uday Bhoy S/o Sarvan Bhoy Aged About 42 Years R/o Chichhore Umariya Tahsil Pussore District Raigarh0004872 C.G 7 - Prithvipal Bhoy S/o Sarvan Bhoy Aged About 40 Years R/o Chichhore Umariya Tahsil Pussore District Raigarh C.G 8 - Vishvambhar Bhoy S/o Chinta Bhoy Aged About 60 Years R/o Chichhore Umariya Tahsil Pussore District Raigarh C.G 9 - Laxman Sidar S/o Vikram Sidar Aged About 42 Years R/o Chichhore Umariya Tahsil Pussore District Raigarh C.G 10 - Roopram Sidar S/o Harihar Sidar Aged About 58 Years R/o Chichhore Umariya Tahsil Pussore District Raigarh C.G 11 - Chandrama Sidar W/o Lakshman Sidar Aged About 36 Years R/o Chichhore Umariya Tahsil Pussore District Raigarh C.G 2 12 - Guruwari Sidar W/o Roopram Sidar Aged About 55 Years R/o Chichhore Umariya Tahsil Pussore District Raigarh C.G 13 - Motiram Sidar S/o Viranchi Sidar Aged About 50 Years R/o Chichhore Umariya Tahsil Pussore District Raigarh C.G 14 - Gurudev Bareth S/o Nankuniya Aged About 56 Years R/o Chichhore Umariya Tahsil Pussore District Raigarh C.G 15 - Papitra Chauhan S/o Punniram Chauhan Aged About 50 Years R/o Chichhore Umariya Tahsil Pussore District Raigarh C.G 16 - Prassanjeet S/o Arjun Bhoy Aged About 45 Years R/o Chichhore Umariya Tahsil Pussore District Raigarh C.G 17 - Dayanand Chauhan S/o Dhani Chauhan Aged About 35 Years R/o Chichhore Umariya Tahsil Pussore District Raigarh C.G 18 - Surendra Bhoy S/o Lingraj Bhoy Aged About 58 Years R/o Chichhore Umariya Tahsil Pussore District Raigarh C.G 19 - Anand Ram Bareth S/o Jagdish Bareth Aged About 50 Years R/o Chichhore Umariya Tahsil Pussore District Raigarh C.G 20 - Uttam Sidar S/o Anadi Sidar Aged About 55 Years R/o Chichhore Umariya Tahsil Pussore District Raigarh C.G 21 - Sanjay Bhoy S/o Jogi Bhoy Aged About 46 Years R/o Chichhore Umariya Tahsil Pussore District Raigarh C.G 22 - Rakshapal Bhoy S/o Tejram Bhoy Aged About 55 Years R/o Chichhore Umariya Tahsil Pussore District Raigarh C.G 23 - Sridhar Bhoy S/o Tejram Bhoy Aged About 50 Years R/o Chichhore Umariya Tahsil Pussore District Raigarh C.G ... Respondent(s) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner : Mr. Vivek Tripathi, Advocate. For Respondent-State : Mr. Anurag Tripathi, PL. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 12.09.2025 3 1. This writ petition has been preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs: “10. RELIEFS SOUGHT:- i. That the respondent authorities and the villagers may. kindly be directed provide the compensation of about 10,00000/-jointly severally to the petitioner for two times demolition of rehabilitation house of the Petitioner Surajbal. ii. That the respondent may be directed to provide the land for rehabilitation of the petitioner like wise the other villager the rehabilitation house of the petitioner iii. That, any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper may also kindly be granted to the present petitioner in the interest of justice along with costs of the petition.” 2. Relevant facts of this case are that being aggrieved against the dispossession order dated 18.09.2024 passed by respondent/Tahsildar, petitioner herein has filed an appeal under Section 44(1) of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 (for short, ‘Code of 1959’) along with application under Section 52(2) of Code of 1959 before the respondent/Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) Raigarh C.G, which came to be rejected/dismissed on 23.10.2024 on the ground that respondent/Tahsildar has passed the dispossession order dated 18.09.2024 as per due process of law and appeal filed by non-applicant/petitioner herein is baseless and on basis of false fact. Hence, this writ petition. 3. During course of the arguments, this Court finds that petitioner is having efficacious alternate remedy to file an appeal under Section 4 44(2) of the C.G. Land Revenue Code, 1959 before the concerned Commissioner against the order of the Sub-Division Officer, therefore, this Court is not inclined to entertain this writ petition at this stage. 4. Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal under Section 44(2) of the C.G. Land Revenue Code, 1959 before the concerned Commissioner. CC as per rules. Sd/- Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge J/-