Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 977 (CHH)

PALURAM v. THE ADDITIONAL TAHSILDAR/ NAIB TAHSILDAR

WPC/5124/2025 · 2026-08-30

Shri Arvind Kumar Verma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 / 2 2025:CGHC:49175 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 5124 of 2025 Paluram S/o Late Latkhor Sahu, Aged About 50 Years R/o Village - Danganiya, Tahsil - Patan, District - Durg (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - The Additional Tahsildar/ Naib Tahsildar Jamgaon, Tahsil - Patan, District - Durg (C.G.) 2 - Umesh Kumar Sahu S/o Late Latkhor Sahu, Aged About 55 Years R/o Village - Belhari, P.H. No. 55, Tahsil - Jamgaon (R), Tahsil - Patan, District - Durg (C.G.) (As Per Application) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Umesh Pandey, Advocate For State : Ms. Akanksha Verma Dabhadker, PL (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 25/09/2025 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner filed an application under Section 250 of the C.G. Land Revenue Code, 1959 before the Naib Tahsildar, Jamgaon ( R) for reverting the possession over the land bearing Khasra No.168/11 admeasuring area 0.03 hectare situated at village Belhari, Tahsil Jamgaon, District ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2025.09.25 19:19:44 +0530 2 / 2 Durg. He would next contend that the said application is pending since 27/12/2024, therefore, the respondent No.1 may be directed to decide the same within a stipulated time period. 2. Learned State counsel submits that they have no objection in deciding the said revenue case. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents with utmost circumspection. 4. Considering the entire facts & circumstances of the case and the submissions made by learned counsel for the respective parties, it is directed that the Respondent No.1 shall decide the pending revenue case bearing No.202406101700030 year 2023-2024 (Annexure P/2) expeditiously as soon as possible preferably within a period of 120 days after giving opportunity of hearing to Respondent No.2. 5. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands disposed of. SD/- SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE ashu