1 2025:CGHC:47946 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4965 of 2025 Umesh Kumar Shah S/o Ramkrishna, aged about 59 years, Caste Gond (Scheduled Tribe), R/o Village Bhairamgarh, Tahsil Bhairamgarh, District Bijapur (C.G.) ... Petitioner Versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Revenue & Disaster Management, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Collector, Office of Collectorate, Bijapur, District Bijapur (C.G.) 3 - Yogesh Sharma S/o Gaurishankar Sharma aged about 45 years, Caste- Brahmin, R/o House No. L I G 102, Ward No. 10, Janta Basti Gudhiyari, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Satyendra Mahadewa, Advocate. For Respondents : Ms. Nupur Trivedi, P.L. (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 18/09/2025 1. At the very outset, by way of the instant petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:- 10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside order dated 30.07.2025 Digitally signed by RAVVA UTTEJ KUMAR RAJU 2 (Annexure P/1), passed by the learned Collector, Bijapur (C.G.), and thereby permit the petitioner to sell the subject land to a non-tribal person respondent no. 3 and/or. 10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass any other relief that this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner is preferring the present petition against the order dated 30.07.2025 passed by Collector, District Bijapur (C.G.), whereby the petitioner’s application u/s 165(6)(2) CGLRC, 1959 for permission to sell the tribal land to a non-tribal, has been rejected. He would further contended that the petitioner is under a heavy bank debt i.e., document (Annexure P/08) and he is also suffering from medical condition like psychogenic vomiting and depression i.e., document (Annexure P/10), therefore, he filed this petition. 3. Per contra, learned State counsel would submit that there is alternative remedy is available to the petitioner u/s 44(2) of the C.G. Land Revenue Code, 1959, therefore, the instant petition is not maintainable. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents. 5. Looking to the entire facts and circumstances of the case and the relief prayed for by the petitioner, the instant petition is not maintainable on account of availability of alternate remedy under Section 44 (2) of the C.G. Land Revenue Code, 1959, therefore, I am not inclined to entertain this petition and this petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file appeal before the 3 concerned authority under Section 44 of C.G. Land Revenue Code, 1959, if so desires. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid liberty. SD/- Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE U.K. Raju