1 / 3 2025:CGHC:5880 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 6067 of 2024 1 - Atma Ram S/o Sabal Sai Aged About 61 Years Caste Gond, R/o Village Parsagudi, Ps And Tehsil - Rajpur, District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (Chhattisgarh) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 2 - Union Of India Through The Secretary, Ministry Of Tribal Affairs, Shastri Bhawan, Dr. Rajendra Prasad Road, New Delhi-110011 3 - The Sub-Divisional Level Committee Through Its Chairperson Cum S.D.M., Tehsil Rajpur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (Chhattisgarh) 4 - The District Level Committee Through Its Chairperson Cum District Collector, Tehsil Rajpur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (Chhattisgarh) 5 - The State Level Monitoring Committee Through Its Chairperson Cum Chief Secretary, Government Of Chhattisgarh 6 - The Nodal Agency, Department For Development Of Tribal And Scheduled Caste, Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) 2 / 3 For Petitioner : Mr. Pavas Sharma, Advocate For Respondents/ State : Mr. Ritesh Giri, Panel lawyer For Respondent No.2/ UOI : Ms. Anmol Sharma, Central Govt. Counsel (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE BIBHU DATTA GURU) Order on Board 31/01/2025 1. The limited grievance that the petitioner has raised in the present writ petition is for an appropriate direction to the respondents to consider and decide his applications for grant of forest rights over the properties in possession of the petitioner. 2. According to the counsel for petitioner, he has approached the District Administration for an appropriate order in-terms of the Scheduled Tribes and other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act 2006. However, till date no decision has been taken on the said application, therefore, he has come to the Writ Court as of now. 3. The learned counsel for the State on the other hand submits that the petitioner seems to have approached directly to State- authorities in-terms of the aforesaid Act of 2006, whereas the petitioner ought to have first approached the Gram Sabha and the Gram Sabha in-turn has to pass a resolution and the resolution has to be forwarded to the State Administration for further approval and sanction. 4. Given the said facts and circumstances of the case, the present writ petition as of now is disposed of permitting the petitioner to approach the concerned Gram Sabha in-respect-of his grievances 3 / 3 and the Gram Sabha in-turn may consider and decide the same on its own merits in accordance with law. Further, subject to the Gram Sabha moving an appropriate resolution, if at all in favour of the petitioner, the respondent-authorities are also expected to take an appropriate decision on the same at the earliest. In any case, since the petitioner has already approached the respondents no. 3 & 4. the respondents no. 3 & 4 are also directed to refer the matter to the concerned Gram Sabha in- respect-of of the grievance of the petitioner. 5. It is made clear that the action on the part of the respondents on the application of the petitioner, is expected to be taken up at the earliest. Meanwhile, the respondents may not initiate any coercive steps against the petitioner from being dispossessed of the said property. 6. The present writ petition accordingly stands disposed of. Sd/- (BIBHU DATTA GURU) JUDGE $. Bhilwar