1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 6401 of 2024 1 - Mansa Khan S/o Kalla Khan Aged About 39 Years Occupation- Cultivation, R/o Kansara, P.C. No. 09, Revenue Circle Khudiya, Tehsil Lormi, District Mungeli (Chhattisgarh) 2 - Khanu Khan S/o Lalu Khan Aged About 52 Years Occupation- Cultivation, R/o Kansara, P.C. No. 09, Revenue Circle Khudiya, Tehsil Lormi, District Mungeli (Chhattisgarh) 3 - Nathu Khan S/o Khanu Khan Aged About 60 Years Occupation- Cultivation, R/o Kansara, P.C. No. 09, Revenue Circle Khudiya, Tehsil Lormi, District Mungeli (Chhattisgarh) 4 - Amra Khan S/o Kaliya Khan Aged About 53 Years Occupation- Cultivation, R/o Kansara, P.C. No. 09, Revenue Circle Khudiya, Tehsil Lormi, District Mungeli (Chhattisgarh) 5 - Nizam Khan S/o Gunda Khan Aged About 47 Years Occupation- Cultivation, R/o Kansara, P.C. No. 09, Revenue Circle Khudiya, Tehsil Lormi, District Mungeli (Chhattisgarh) 6 - Hasan Khan S/o Hajuri Khan Aged About 37 Years Occupation- Cultivation, R/o Kansara, P.C. No. 09, Revenue Circle Khudiya, Tehsil Lormi, District Mungeli (Chhattisgarh) VISHAKHA BEOHAR Digitally signed by VISHAKHA BEOHAR 2 7 - Sheikhu Khan S/o Manu Khan Aged About 69 Years Occupation- Cultivation, R/o Kansara, P.C. No. 09, Revenue Circle Khudiya, Tehsil Lormi, District Mungeli (Chhattisgarh) 8 - Jaan Mohammed Khan S/o Kalla Khan Aged About 48 Years Occupation- Cultivation, R/o Kansara, P.C. No. 09, Revenue Circle Khudiya, Tehsil Lormi, District Mungeli (Chhattisgarh) 9 - Piriya Khan S/o Lalu Khan Aged About 66 Years Occupation- Cultivation, R/o Kansara, P.C. No. 09, Revenue Circle Khudiya, Tehsil Lormi, District Mungeli (Chhattisgarh) ... Petitioners versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Forest, Secretariate, Mahanadi Bhavan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Divisional Forest Officer Mungeli Forest Division, District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh 3 - Collector District Mungeli (Chhattisgarh) 4 - Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Lormi, District Mungeli (Chhattisgarh) 5 - Tahsildar Lormi, District Mungeli (Chhattisgarh) .. Respondents (Cause-title taken from the Case Information System) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Petitioner :- Mr. Yogesh Chandra Sharma, Mr. Govind Ram Miri & Mr. Harsh Tripathi, Advocates For State :- Mr. Satish Gupta, G.A. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 3 SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order On Board 20.03.2025 1. By way of this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for following reliefs:- “10.1 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records from the Respondents pertaining to the "Kaksh Kramank 1523 of Kansari Parisar" for its kind perusal. 10.2 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly further be pleased to direct the respondent to award the compensation Rs.15.00 lacs (Rupees fifteen lacs only) to each petitioner for the house/s due to illegal demolition, with interest @ 18% from the date of demolition i.e. 5/10/2024 within stipulated period. 10.3 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly further be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus restraining the Respondent Authorities not to interfere in residential and cultivating rights of the petitioners in future. 10.4 That, any other reliefs which this Hon'ble High Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case be also granted to the petitioners in the interest of justice.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the petitioners are in possession of their own land which they have obtained in Patta granted by the State Government, however, due to the quarrel between two Departments i.e. Forest Department and the Revenue Department, the petitioners are being harassed by the authorities concerned. It is submitted that the petitioners are 4 having every document to show their title and possession and they are not encroachers, however, the same aspect has not been considered by the authorities concerned. 3. On the other hand, learned State counsel submits that vide Annexure P/4 itself, the petitioners have annexed the documents in which the Divisional Forest Officer, Mungeli has passed an order directing them to remove their encroachment and they have failed to show any document in this respect and have also not filed any reply to the notice issued by the Divisional Forest Officer, Mungeli. 4. Upon this, learned counsel for the petitioners submit that they have filed the reply and have also filed relevant documents, however, it has not been considered and without considering this aspect, the respondent authorities have started dismantling the house where the petitioners and their family members are residing. 5. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the documents available in record. 6. Considering the aforesaid submissions made by the parties, it seems that the petitioners have to approach before the competent Civil Jurisdictional Court for their grievance, however, since the respondents were bent to remove the petitioner from their house, therefore, they have approached this Court. Counsel for the petitioners have fairly submitted that they will go before the competent Civil Court for redressal of their grievance. 5 7. Considering the aforesaid aspect of the matter, the petitioners are directed to file appropriate application/suit before the concerned Civil Court within a period of four weeks along with copy of this order and the concerned respondent authorities are also directed to not to take any further steps to remove the encroachment of the petitioners, till the matter is seized and the application for interim relief is passed in favour or against the petitioners by the competent Civil jurisdictional Court. It is made clear that the pendency of this petition is also required to be considered by the concerned Civil Court. 8. Accordingly, this petition stands disposed off with aforesaid observations and directions. sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Vishakha