1 / 3 2025:CGHC:55023 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 5890 of 2025 • Kalam Ansari S/o Late Noor Mohammad Aged About 65 Years R/o Village Ropakhar, Tahsil Mainpat, District Sarguja (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Revenue And Desastar Management, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar New Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2. Commissioner Surguja Division District Surguja (C.G.) 3. Collector Surguja District Surguja (C.G.) 4. Sub Divisional Officer Sitapur District Surguja (C.G.) 5. Tahsildar Tahsil Mainpat District Surguja (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Pritam Kumar Tiwari, Advocate For Respondents-State : Mr. Rishabh Bisen, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 12/11/2025 1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs. “10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash Notice dated 09.10.2025, bearing no. 91/Vachak/Tah./2024, issued by the respondent No. 5. 10.2 That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the order dated 09.10.2025, passed in the Revenue Case No. 202508020800004, passed by respondent No. 5. 10.3 That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be PAWAN KUMAR JHA Digitally signed by PAWAN KUMAR JHA 2 / 3 pleased to command and direct the respondent authorities to grant lease of 0.0030 hectare land of Khasra No. 700, situated at village Ropakhar, Tahsil Mainpat, District Surguja, C.G. to the petitioner. 10.4 Any other relief(s)/ order(s)/direction(s) in favour of petitioner, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice. 10.5 Cost of the petition.” 2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner has earlier submitted an application under Rule 6 of the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Rules, 2007 (for short “Forest Rights Rules, 2007”) on 14.09.2016. According to Annexure P-4, this application was processed and is pending consideration before the District Committee. During pendency of this application for grant of rights over the land possessed by him, Respondent No. 5/Tahsildar has initiated proceedings under Section 248 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 and without considering the pleadings and reply, that application is still pending consideration for grant of lease/ patta, had passed an order of eviction and on the same date has issued eviction warrant vide Annexure P- 1. He submits that as the application of petitioner for grant of forest rights is still pending consideration before the appropriate authority, some protection may be granted to petitioner from the proceeding of eviction. 3. Learned State counsel would oppose the submission of learned counsel for petitioner and would submit that against the order of Tahsildar, petitioner is having remedy of filing appeal before the SDO(R.). He however does not dispute the submission of learned counsel for petitioner with regard to submission of application for grant of forest rights vide Annexure P-3. He however submits that application is very old and it might have been decided. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. 5. In the facts of the case, I am not inclined to grant relief as prayed for by 3 / 3 petitioner in para 10.1 & 10.2 of the relief clause, for quashing of the notice and order passed by Tahsildar. However, considering the fact that the petitioner has submitted application for grant of forest rights as early as in the year 2016 and as submitted by counsel for petitioner this application is still pending consideration, I find it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition at this stage directing Respondents No. 3 & 4 to take decision on the application submitted by petitioner for grant of forest rights of the land possessed by him, if already not decided, expeditiously preferably within a further period of 04 months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 6. Till decision is taken by Respondents No. 3 & 4 on the application for grant of forest rights submitted by petitioner, status quo as it exists today with respect to possession of petitioner shall be maintained by the parties. 7. It is made clear that if the order passed by this Court is not placed before Respondents No. 3 & 4 within a further period of 02 weeks, the protection granted to petitioner shall loose its effect. 8. With the aforesaid observation and direction, writ petition stands disposed of. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) pwn JUDGE