1 2026:CGHC:578 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3 of 2026 1.Muktanand Mahar S/o Ramlal Aged About 56 Years Caste- Mahar, R/o- Village Jhitiya, Police Station And Tahsil- Ambagarh Chowki, District- Mohla- Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.) 2.Smt. Sulka Bai W/o Late Shri Murlidhar Aged About 55 Years R/o- Village Jhitiya, Police Station And Tahsil- Ambagarh Chowki, District- Mohla-Manpur- Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.) 3.Subhash S/o Late Murlidhar Aged About 32 Years R/o- Village Jhitiya, Police Station And Tahsil- Ambagarh Chowki, District- Mohla-Manpur- Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.) 4.Jyoti Bai D/o Late Shri Murlidhar Aged About 34 Years R/o- Village Jhitiya, Police Station And Tahsil- Ambagarh Chowki, District- Mohla-Manpur- Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.) 5.Smt. Pratima D/o Late Shri Murlidhar Aged About 28 Years R/o- Village Jhitiya, Police Station And Tahsil- Ambagarh Chowki, District- Mohla-Manpur- Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.) 6.Smt. Kiran D/o Late Shri Murlidhar Aged About 26 Years R/o- Village Jhitiya, Police Station And Tahsil- Ambagarh Chowki, District- Mohla-Manpur- Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.) 7.Sandeep S/o Late Murlidhar Aged About 24 Years R/o- Village Jhitiya, Police Station And Tahsil- Ambagarh Chowki, District- Mohla-Manpur- Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1.State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Mantralaya, Atal Nagar Raipur, Police Station- Rakhi, Tahsil And District Raipur (C.G.) 2.Collector Mohla-Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.) SANTOSH KUMAR SHARMA Digitally signed by SANTOSH KUMAR SHARMA Date: 2026.01.07 10:39:17 +0530 2 3.Tahsildar Ambagarh Chowki, District- Mohla-Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.) 4.Chandar Singh S/o Atmaraj Aged About 55 Years Caste- Mahar, Occupation- Agriculturist, R/o- Village Jhitiya, Police Station And Tahsil- Ambagarh Chowki, District- Mohla-Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.) 5.Ram Sai S/o Chimman Aged About 58 Years Caste- Mahar, Occupation- Agriculturist, R/o- Village Jhitiya, Police Station And Tahsil- Ambagarh Chowki, District- Mohla-Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.) 6.Santosh S/o Ram Singh Aged About 53 Years Caste- Mahar, Occupation- Agriculturist, R/o- Village Jhitiya, Police Station And Tahsil- Ambagarh Chowki, District- Mohla-Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.) 7.Vimla Bai D/o Kartikram Aged About 45 Years Caste- Mahar, Occupation- Agriculturist, R/o- Village Jhitiya, Police Station And Tahsil- Ambagarh Chowki, District- Mohla-Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.) 8.Sukwaro Bai D/o Soma Aged About 60 Years Caste- Mahar, Occupation- Agriculturist, R/o- Village Aamatola, Police Station And Tahsil- Ambagarh Chowki, District- Mohla-Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ratnesh Kumar Agrawal, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sabyasachi Choubey, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order on Board 06/01/2026v 1.The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 07.07.2022, order dated 18.07.2025 and 31.10.2025 passed by the Respondent No. 3/Tahsildar in revenue case No. 202207091200058/A-27/2021-2022, revenue case No. 202207091200058/A- 27/2021-2022 and revenue case No. 2023109802000059/A-27/2023-24 by which Tahsildar without giving opportunity of hearing has initiated the 3 proceedings against the judgment debtor and has also initiated proceedings for partition of the property which belongs to the petitioner. The petitioners have further prayed for quashing of the order passed by the Tahsildar (Annexure P/2) wherein the Tahsildar has restrained the petitioners to construct the house and has passed interim order against them. 2.Facts of the case in brief, are that the respondent No. 4 to 8 have filed the civil suit before Civil Judge Class-I Ambagarh Chowki, Rajnandgaon which was registered as Civil Appeal No. 2-A/2007, learned Civil Judge Class-I vide its judgment and decree dated 26.04.2018 has decreed the suit filed by them. Against that order, the present petitioners have preferred the first Appeal before First Additional District Judge, Rajnandgaon which was registered as Civil Appeal No. 4-A/2022 wherein the First Additional District Judge has dismissed the appeal and thereafter the respondents have moved the application for partition under Order 20 Rule 18 CPC wherein Tahsildar has initiated the proceedings for partition. Hence, this petition for quashing of the order dated 07.07.2022, 18.07.2025 and 31.10.2025. 3.Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that without giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioners the Tahsildar passed the impugned order which is glaring violation of principle of natural justice and would pray for allowing the petition. 4.On the other hand, learned counsel for the responded/State would submit that submit that the petitioner has initiated the proceedings under the Land Revenue Code, therefore, a forum is available to him under Land Revenue Code to agitate his grievances, as such alternate and efficacious remedy are available, therefore, writ petition is not maintainable and would pray for dismissal of the petition. 4 5.Since the petitioner has alternate and efficacious remedy of filing appeal as per Section 44 of the Land Revenue Code thereafter revision under Section 50 of the Land Revenue Code 1959, therefore, the writ petition is not maintainable at this juncture and is dismissed as not maintainable. However, It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything on the merit of the contention made by the petitioners and the same is left open for adjudication by the Appellate Authority who will decide the same in accordance with the law. It is also directed that if the appeal is preferred within 45 days from the date of receipt of the copy of the order neither the appellate Authority nor the respondents No. 4 to 8 will take plea of limitation. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge Santosh