1 2025:CGHC:51415 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 5425 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, Uirban 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 - Rampyari, W/o Guddu, R/o Village Juna Lakhanpur, Tahsil Lakhanpur, District Surguja (C.G.). ... Respondent(s) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner : Mr. CJK Rao, Advocate. For Respondent-State : Mr. Praveen Das, Dy. AG. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 15.10.2025 2 1. This writ petition has been preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs: “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. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the proceeding drawn by the concerned Tahsildar vide Annexure P-1 and order has been passed on 14.03.2023 for eviction and, thereafter, the eviction warrant has been issued for the first time on 16.07.2025 (Annexure P-2) against respondent No.6, but till date the respondent No.6 has not vacate the illegal possession from the said plot. He further contended that this writ petition may be disposed of with a direction to the concerned respondent-authority to consider and decide the pending application/representation of the petitioner Annexure P-3, within any specified time frame in accordance with law/rules. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents/State submits that he is having no objection to the limited prayer made by counsel for 3 the petitioner with regard to early disposal of the pending representation. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 5. Considering facts of the case, nature of relief, above submissions of counsel for the parties, this writ petition is disposed of at this stage directing respondent No.4 to consider and decide the pending application/representation of the petitioner (Annexure P- 3), expeditiously, in accordance with relevant rule/law/regulation after giving proper/sufficient opportunity of hearing to the parties. 6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. CC as per rules. Sd/- Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge J/-