1 2025:CGHC:55535 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 5947 of 2025 • Sabar Hussain, S/o Late Hadis Ansari, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Village Ramchandrapur, Tahsil Ramchandrapur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.). ... Petitioner versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through The Department Of Revenue, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.). 2. The Secretary Department Of Forest, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.). 3. The Collector, Balrampur / Chairman Of The District Level Van Adhikar Committee Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.). 4. Assistant Commissioner/Secretary, District Level Van Adhikar Samiti Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.). 5. The Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Chairman Of Divisional, District Level Van Adhikar Samiti Ramanujganj, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.). 6. Nayab Tahsildar, Ramchandrapur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.). 7. Secretary Of Panchayat Level Van Adhikar Committee, Village Panchayat Ramchandrapur, Tahsil Ramchandrapur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.). ... Respondents (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. A. N. Pandey, Advocate. For State/Respondents : Mr. Anurag Tripathi, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order on Board 14/11/2025 1. This petition has been preferred by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking following reliefs:- DEEPTI JHA Digitally signed by DEEPTI JHA 2 “10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to consider and decide the application dated 07.11.2025 (Annexure-P/5) for grant of Van Adhikari Patta of the subject land bearing Khasra No.147 rakba 0.04 hectare situated at Village Ramchandrapur, Tahsil Ramchandrapur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) within stipulated period. 10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to restrain the respondent authorities to not dispossessed the petitioner from the subject land and house till the final decision of the application for grant of Van Adhikari Patta of the subject land of petitioner. 10.3 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside the impugned notice dated 04.11.2025 issued by the respondent No.6 Annexure-P/1. 10.4 Any other relief or reliefs may also be granted to the petitioner which this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Tahsildar has issued warrant of eviction on 04.11.2025 (Annexure-P/1) mentioning that petitioner is in possession of the forest, land and therefore, he may vacate the land possessed by him. He contended that the petitioner is in possession of the land since last about 60 years by constructing a residential house. Name of the father of the petitioner is also recorded in ‘Khasra Paanchshala’ in column No.12 (possessor). Khasra Paanchshala’, which is filed as Annexure- P/2 is of the year 1998-1999 onwards. Petitioner has filed an application for Van Adhikar (forest rights) vide Annexure-P/5 before the Collector, which is pending consideration, and therefore, a direction be issued to the Collector to consider and decide the application and till decision protection may be granted to him. 3. Learned counsel for the State opposes the submission made by the counsel for petitioner and submits that, Annexure-P/1 is a warrant of eviction from the government land, encroached upon by the petitioner. He pointed out that from the contents of the eviction notice, it is apparent that though the land is recorded as government land (Chhote Jhadd Ka Jungle), because the land is situated in the forest area. However, the said land is reserved for the boys 3 hostel in revenue records, which is also mentioned in Annexure-P/1, the eviction warrant, and therefore, the submission of counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is residing in the said house for last about 60 years since the time of father does not appear to be correct. Petitioner is having the remedy available to challenge the order/warrant issued against the petitioner before the Court of competent jurisdiction. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the documents along with the writ petition. 5. Perusal of Annexure-P/1 would show that prior to the issuance of the notice, demarcation was conducted on the application submitted by the Superintendent Pre- Metric Ashram Boys Hostel, Ramchandrapur mentioning therein that the petitioner has encroached upon the land reserved for the Ashram Boys Hostel. Demarcation was conducted and in the said demarcation, it was found that the petitioner has encroached upon the land reserved for Pre- Metric Ashram Boys Hostel, Ramchandrapur and have constructed a small ‘Kachcha’ house. 6. The petitioner has not challenged the proceedings of demarcation before the higher authority. From the heading of the warrant, it appears that this is the reminder eviction warrant issued. Earlier also, the eviction warrant was issued, however, the petitioner has not challenged that eviction warrant also. From the pleadings made in the writ petition, it is not apparent that the petitioner’s entire house, as projected by way of the photographs is constructed upon the encroached land, and therefore, this Court cannot go into the said aspect, but it can only be decided by way of recording evidence of the respective parties including the Revenue Officials. 7. The application (Annexure-P/5), which is stated to have been filed by the petitioner for the forest rights over the land encroached upon by him is only submitted on 07.11.2025, after the multiple eviction notices were issued to the petitioner. In the facts of the case, in the opinion of this Court, no case is 4 made out for interference in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. However, petitioner is at liberty to take recourse to law available to him for redressal of his grievance, if any. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge