1 2026:CGHC:17797 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3751 of 2021 1 - Smt Rajesh Devi W/o Shri Rajendra Gupta Aged About 63 Years R/o Near Bade Mandir Takhatpur, Tehsil Takhatpur District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Collector, Bilaspur District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 2 - Sub Divisional Officer Takhatpur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 3 - Tehsildar Tehsil Takhatpur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 4 - Station House Officer Takhatpur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 5 - Rajkumar S/o Bahoran Lal Patel R/o Village Khapri, Tehsil Takhatpur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (Cause Title is taken from CIS System) For Petitioner : Mr. Kaushal Yadav, Advocate For State : Ms. Akanksha Verma, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 20/04/2026 1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs : Digitally signed by SHAYNA KADRI 2 “10.1 That, Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to comply the order dated 17.07.2017, whereby the order has been passed for removal of the illegal encroachment. 10.2 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. Facts of the case, as projected in the petition, are that the petitioner is the recorded owner and in possession of land bearing Khasra No. 281/2, admeasuring 0.320 hectare, situated at Village Khapri, P.H. No. 27, Tehsil Takhatpur, District Bilaspur. The ownership and title of the petitioner over the said land are duly reflected in the revenue records. The petitioner, being a lawful owner, has been utilizing the said land and is entitled to peaceful access and enjoyment thereof. It is the case of the petitioner that respondent No. 5 has illegally encroached upon a public pathway leading to the petitioner’s land by raising unauthorized constructions, including a lavatory and a godown. Due to such encroachment over the public way, the petitioner has been effectively deprived of ingress and egress to her own land, thereby causing serious hardship and obstruction in the use and enjoyment of the property. Aggrieved by the said illegal encroachment, the petitioner approached the competent revenue authority by filing an application under Section 248 of the 3 Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code before the Tahsildar on 27.12.2016. Upon receipt of the application, a Panchnama and spot inspection report were prepared by the concerned authorities, which confirmed the existence of encroachment by respondent No. 5 over the public land. Consequently, the Tehsildar issued notice to respondent No. 5 for removal of the encroachment and further proceeded to issue a Bedakhali warrant for eviction. Despite the aforesaid proceedings and issuance of eviction warrant by the competent authority, the encroachment has not been removed till date. The petitioner, left with no alternative, made repeated representations to higher authorities, including applications submitted before the Collector on 30.08.2019 and again on 17.03.2021, requesting intervention and enforcement of the orders passed by the Tehsildar. However, no effective action has been taken by the authorities concerned, and the grievance of the petitioner remains unaddressed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the inaction on the part of the respondent authorities is arbitrary, illegal, and contrary to the provisions of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code. It is contended that once the competent authority, after due inquiry, has recorded a finding of encroachment and has even issued a Bedakhali warrant, the authorities are under a legal obligation to ensure its execution. The continued failure to remove the encroachment amounts to dereliction of statutory duty. It is further 4 submitted that the petitioner is an elderly lady who intends to sell her land; however, due to the illegal obstruction caused by respondent No. 5 over the public pathway, access to the land has been completely blocked. This has rendered the property commercially unviable and has caused grave prejudice and financial hardship to the petitioner. Learned counsel also contends that despite repeated approaches and representations made to the Collector and other authorities, no action has been taken, which reflects administrative apathy and violation of the petitioner’s legal rights. The petitioner cannot be left remediless in the face of such blatant inaction, particularly when the encroachment stands duly established in official proceedings. It is also argued that it is a settled principle of law, as consistently held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, that public land and pathways cannot be encroached upon and that the State and its authorities are duty-bound to remove such encroachments in order to protect public rights. The failure of the respondents to act against the encroacher not only violates the rights of the petitioner but also undermines the rule of law. In view of the above, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that appropriate directions be issued to the respondent authorities to forthwith remove the encroachment made by respondent No. 5 from the public pathway and to ensure compliance of the orders already passed by the competent revenue authorities within a time-bound manner. 5 4. Learned State counsel submits that the material facts of the case are not in dispute. It is fairly admitted that upon due inquiry, a finding has already been recorded to the effect that respondent No. 5 had encroached upon a portion of Government land bearing Khasra No. 280. Pursuant thereto, a dispossession warrant dated 17.07.2025 has been duly issued against respondent No. 5, and in furtherance of the said warrant, necessary steps for removal of the encroachment have been undertaken. It is submitted that upon execution of the warrant and removal of the encroacher, a compliance report is to be submitted by the concerned Jamadar Mal, thereby indicating that the process for redressal of the grievance has already been set in motion. It is further contended that in view of the aforesaid action taken by the competent authorities, nothing substantial survives for adjudication in the present writ petition, as the grievance of the petitioner stands effectively addressed. On these submissions, it is urged that the present writ petition, being devoid of merit, deserves to be dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the material available on record. 6. The grievance of the petitioner revolves around the alleged encroachment made by respondent No. 5 over a public pathway, which is stated to be the only access to the petitioner’s land bearing Khasra No. 281/2. It is the specific case of the petitioner 6 that despite initiation of proceedings under Section 248 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code and issuance of Bedakhali warrant, the encroachment has not been removed till date. 7. Considering the rival submissions and upon perusal of the record, it appears that there exists a dispute with regard to the nature, extent and status of the alleged encroachment as well as the rights of the parties over the land in question. The issue raised involves disputed questions of fact, including the exact location of the alleged encroachment, the nature of the land and the entitlement of the parties, which cannot be conclusively adjudicated by this Court in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. At the same time, considering the dispute raised by the petitioner, it appears that the State authorities are required to take appropriate steps in accordance with law and to initiate/complete proceedings against the alleged encroacher, if so warranted. 8. In view of the aforesaid, without entering into the merits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the respondent authorities, particularly the Tahsildar, Takhatpur, to consider the complaint/application made by the petitioner and to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. The said exercise shall be undertaken after affording due opportunity of hearing to both the petitioner as well as respondent No. 5. 7 9. Further, from perusal of the documents available on record, it prima facie appears that both the petitioner as well as respondent No. 5 are not having any clear legal enforceable right over the land in question. Considering this aspect, and also taking note of the fact that certain construction, including a toilet, is stated to have already been raised over the disputed land, the competent authority shall pass appropriate orders strictly in accordance with law, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case. 10. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions. No order as to costs. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Shayna Judge