Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 6484 (CHH)

DADULAL SAHU v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPC/607/2025 · 2025-01-30

Shri Bibhu Datta Guru

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 / 2 2025:CGHC:5461 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 607 of 2025 1 - Dadulal Sahu S/o Puniram Aged About 38 Years Agriculturist R/o Village Kashigarh, Post Kashigarh, Tahsil Jaijaipur, District - Sakti (C.G.) 2 - Babulal Sahu S/o Puniram Aged About 36 Years Agriculturist R/o Village Kashigarh, Post Kashigarh, Tahsil Jaijaipur, District - Sakti (C.G.) 3 - Raju Sahu S/o Puniram Aged About 34 Years Agriculturist R/o Village Kashigarh, Post Kashigarh, Tahsil Jaijaipur, District - Sakti (C.G.) ... Petitioners versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Revenue Department, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Collector, District - Sakti (C.G.) 3 - The Tahsildar, Jaijaipur, District - Sakti (C.G.) 4 - Gopal Das Mahant, Aged About 42 Years S/o Mangudas Mahant, Sarpanch Gram Panchayat Kashigarh, Village Kashigarh, Tahsil Jaijaipur, District - Sakti (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Petitioners : Mr. Bharat Lal Dembra, Advocate For Respondents/ State : Mr. Shreyansh Mehta, Panel Lawyer (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE BIBHU DATTA GURU) Order on Board 2 / 2 30/01/2025 1. By the present writ petition, the petitioners are questioning the order dated 23/12/2024 (Annexure P/1) passed by respondent No.3/ Tahsildar, Jaijaipur, District Sakti whereby the Tahsildar has rejected the complaint filed by the petitioners. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that while rejecting the complaint of the petitioners, the Tahsildar has given a liberty to the petitioners to approach before the appropriate authority under Section 250 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 (for short, “the Act of 1959”). 3. Learned counsel appearing for the State has no objection to the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents. 5. Perusal of the impugned order would show that though the Tahsildar has rejected the complaint made by the petitioners but at the same time, the liberty has been granted to them to approach before the appropriate authority under Section 250 of the Act of 1959. 6. In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed of with the liberty as stated supra. The petitioners may approach before the appropriate authority by questioning the order dated 23/12/2024 passed by the Tahsildar. Sd/- (BIBHU DATTA GURU) JUDGE $. Bhilwar