1 2025:CGHC:52038 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 5521 of 2025 Mahendra Pal Padwar S/o C.L. Padwar Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Lakhanpur, District- Surguja (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Urban Administration Development Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Collector Ambikapur, District- Surguja (C.G.) 3 - Sub Divisional Officer Udaypur, District- Surguja (C.G.) 4 - Tahsildar Tahsil Lakhanpur, District- Surguja (C.G.) 5 - Station House Officer Lakhanpur, District- Surguja (C.G.) 6 - Dinesh Kumar Pandey S/o Martand Pandey R/o Village Juna Lakhanpur, Tahsil Lakhanpur, District- Surguja (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner : Mr. CJK Rao, Advocate. For Respondent-State : Ms. Upasana Mehta, Dy. GA. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 17.10.2025 2 1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition with following reliefs: “10. RELIEF(S) SOUGHT:- 10.1 That, Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to initiate the eviction proceeding against respondent No. 6 at an earliest. 10.2 That, Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to comply the orders and directions issued from time to time for eviction proceedings. 10.3 Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper may also be passed in favour of the petitioner together with cost of the petition.” 2. Brief facts of this case are that the petitioner is the resident of Village -Juna Lakhanpur. Respondent No.6 illegally occupied the government land at Village -Juna Lakhanpur, having Khasra No. 1272/1, area 0.242 hectare. The Collector vide order dated 13.04.2016 has cancelled the Patta granted in favour of respondent no.6 and directed to delete name of respondent no.6 from the revenue records and enter the above land in government head. Against which, respondent no.6 has preferred an appeal before the concerned Commissioner, which came to be dismissed. Against which, respondent no.6 preferred the revision before the Board of Revenue, which was also dismissed, but till date respondent no.6 still in possession over the above government land. In this regard, petitioner also made a application before the concerned Tahsildar, but till date no action has been taken. Hence 3 this writ petition. 3. During course of the arguments, this Court finds that petitioner has neither the complainant nor the party before the Revenue Court, therefore, this writ petition is not maintainable. 4. Accordingly, writ petition is hereby dismissed. However, petitioner will be at liberty to pursue the matter before the concerned Revenue Authority/Revenue Court. CC as per rules. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge J/-