1 2025:CGHC:51578 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 5435 of 2025 1 - Manmohan Sahu S/o Ghanshyam Sahu Aged About 46 Years R/o Village - Danikundi, Post Office - Danikundi, Tahsil - Marwahi, District - Gourela-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - The Secretary Department Of Forest, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Collector Gourela, District - Gourela-Pendra-Marwahi, Chhattisgarh 4 - Sub-Divisional Office (Revenue) Sub-Division, Marwahi, District - Gourela-Pendra- Marwahi (C.G.) 5 - Divisional Forest Officer Marwahi, Forest Division - Pendraroad, District - Gourela- Pendra-Marwahi Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dharmesh Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mrs. Akanksha Verma, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 16/10/2025 1. With the consent of the parties, heard finally. 2. By way of the instant petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:- 2 “10.1 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for entire records pertaining to the case of the petitioner. 10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the petition and issue a writ in the nature of mandamus, quashing the impugned order dated 11.09.2025 (Annexure P-1) passed by the respondent No.5. 10.3 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass an order and the respondent authorities may be directed to take fresh decision in accordance with the provisions given under The Scheduled Tribe and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Reorganization of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 considering the correct facts and circumstances of the case as the petitioner is having possession over the land since last more than 25-30 years. 10.4 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ directing the respondent authorities to grant a proper lease (Patta) of the concerned land to the petitioner in which he is residing since last more than 25-30 years. 10.5 Any other relief may also be granted to 3 the petitioner which this Hon’ble Court deemed fit in facts and circumstances of the case.” 3. The petitioner has filed the instant writ petition challenging the impugned eviction order dated 11.09.2025 passed by the respondent No.5, Divisional Forest Officer, Marwahi, directing the eviction of the petitioner from forest land bearing Khasra No. 60/1 under Section 80(a) of the Indian Forest Act, 1927. 4. The brief facts of the case as projected by the petitioner are that the petitioner, a member of the Scheduled Castes and a traditional forest dweller, has been in continuous possession of the land for over 20 years and claims ownership rights under the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) on a Act, 2006. A Gram Sabha resolution dated 21.04.2016 supports his claim, based Panchnama dated 21.04.2016. Despite submitting an application for forest rights and replying to initial show-cause notices, the respondents ignored his submissions, failed to process his Forest Right claim, and passed the order without initiating proper eviction proceedings or affording him an opportunity for hearing. 5. Hence this petition. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that in the year 2016 a resolution was passed by Gram Sabha of Village Panchayat, Banshital, Tahsil Marwahi, District Bilaspur (now Gourela Pendra - Marwahi) (C.G.) that the petitioner is entitled to 4 get ownership right of the land as he has possession over the land since long back. He would next contend that the aforesaid resolution passed on the basis of Panchnama dated 21.04.2016, whereby the Sarpanch, President of Forest Right Committee, Ward Panch, Kotwar and some other villagers were panch of the deed. He would next contend that the aforesaid resolution was passed as the petitioner has preferred a claim for right over the forest land on 21.04.2016 to the State Government through Tahsildar. The application filed by the petitioner was not taken into consideration but a show cause notice under Section 80(a) of Indian Forest Act, 1927, was sent to him on 28.01.2022, whereby he was asked why the action may not be taken against him in accordance with law and it was further ordered that if the notice was not replied with proper explanation within stipulated time of 15 days, then an order will be passed and the expenses will be recovered from the petitioner as recovery of revenue. He would next contend that the petitioner filed his reply to the aforesaid show cause notice and stated that he has not done any kind of offence. He would lastly contend that without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and without considering his earlier reply the DFO has passed the impugned order dated 11/09/2025, therefore, the same being arbitrary, violative of natural justice principles, and infringing Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution and there is an inter- departmental dispute, as revenue authorities closed parallel encroachment proceedings in 5 2022 after verifying the petitioner's documents, the impugned order may be quashed. 7. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the documents with utmost circumspection. 9. Perusal of the documents would show that on 21/04/2016 the Gram Sabha has passed the proposal in favour of the petitioner vide Annexure P/3 and recommended for grant of Patta for the land bearing Khasra No.60/1, 0.0130 hectares. Therefore, it is directed that as per the provisions of Scheduled Tribe and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Reorganization of Forest Rights) Act, 2006, the sub-divisional level committee constituted under Section 6 of the Act, 2006 shall decide the matter, if not already decided, in accordance with law expeditiously as soon as possible. Till then no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner. 10. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the respondent authorities shall be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law. 11. With the aforesaid observation, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE Madhurima