1 2025:CGHC:49527 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 5182 of 2025 Dilip Kumar Yadav S/o Mangaru Yadav Aged About 46 Years R/o Village- Vimalapur, P.S. -Trikunda, Tahshil- Ramchandrapur, District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary, Department Of Forest And Climate Change, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Principal Chief Conservator Of Forest Department Of Forest And Climate Change, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - The Collector District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) 4 - The Division Forest Officer / (DFO) Balrampur Forest Division Balrampur, District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) 5 - The Perimeter Assistant (Parichhetra Sahayak) Dindo, Department Of Forest- District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Navneeet Kumar Yadav, Advocate For State : Mr. Ajit Singh, Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board BHUMIKA ANGARE Digitally signed by BHUMIKA ANGARE Date: 2025.10.09 14:43:21 +0530 2 06.10.2025 1. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally. 2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking following relief:- “10.1 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records pertaining to the case of the present Petitioner from the Respondent authorities concerned for kind perusal. 10.2 The Hon’ble High Court may kindly be pleased to issue writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions, and set-aside impugned order dated 04.08.2025 (Annexure P-1), issued by the Respondent No. 4, ‘in the interest of justice. 10.3 That, the notice dated 21/06/2025 (Annexure P/2) issued by the Respondent No. 5 shall also be quashed in the interest of justice. 10.4 That this Hon’ble Court may further be pleased to direct the respondent authority to grant the lease to the petitioner or pass any other order in favour of petitioner as it may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case with cost. 10.5 Pass any other order under the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a notice has been issued on 04.08.2025 (Annexure P-1). The impugned notice alleges that the petitioner is unauthorized occupants of forest land falling under Compartment No. P-851, Rakba 1.221 hectare, and the petitioner has been asked to remove the encroachment over 3 the Forest land within a period of 5 days. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the petitioner’s forefather have possessed the said land since 1970 and have constructed the house for residential purpose and are residing in the said house peacefully and there is no other house or land of the petitioner except this house. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that it is a rainy season, therefore, some time may be given to the petitioner to vacate the premises and till then no coercive steps be taken against the petitioner. In support of his prayer, he relied upon jktLo iqLrd ifji= ds [k.M pkj&dzekad 2% 82- o”kkZ dky esa gVkuk % e-iz- ‘kklu Hkw&ifjeki ,oa cankscLr foHkkx dzekad 22&27&8&76] Hkksiky fnukad 1&9&76 fo- utwy Hkwfe ij vfrdze.kksa dks o”kkZdky esa gVk;s tkus ckcr~& ¼1½ ;fn oSdfYid LFkku nsuk laHko ugha gS rks mlds }kjk vfrdze.k dks o”kkZdky esa ugha gVkuk pkfg;sA ¼2½ blh o”kZ vfrdze.k fd;k gks mUgsa o”kkZdky lekIr gksus rd ugh gVkuk pkfg;sA ¼3½ xqefV;k¡] Bsys vksj O;kolkf;d vLFkkbZ vfrdze.k Hkh oSdfYid LFkku miyC/k djk;s tkus rd ugha gVkuk pkfg;sA 4. Learned counsel for respondents opposed the submission made by the learned counsel for petitioner. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Looking to the grievances raised by the petitioner and submissions made by the respective parties, it is crystal clear that the proposal of petitioner for grant of lease has already been 4 pending long before the concerned respondent authorities and as per contention of the petitioner that he is in possession since 1970 and is residing in forest land under Compartment No. P-851, Rakba 1.221 hectare by constructing house. It is directed that concerned respondent authority shall decide the proposal (Annexure P/4) in accordance with rules, law and regulation and while deciding the proposal for granting patta to the petitioner, the respondent authorities shall not take any coercive action against the petitioner till decision of the proposal. 7. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything on the merits of the case. 8. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Bhumika